Close



Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 88
  1. #26
    FEP Super Member erratic50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    4,575

    Default

    O2 harness differences are discussed here

    https://www.stangnet.com/mustang-for...-trans.873720/

  2. #27

    Default

    Thank you. Shouldn't be a problem.

    Rock Auto says they are out of stock on all the '93 Mustang ECMs.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  3. #28

    Default

    I gave the seller another chance to explain himself about the "identical to '93 Cobra MAF", and he decided to tell me it IS a rare '93 Cobra 70mm housing with a '93 GT sensor swapped onto it. Why would you say it's IDENTICAL to a '93 Cobra housing if it IS a '93 Cobra housing?! I totally don't believe him, but I guess it doesn't matter at this point. I have what I need.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  4. #29

    Default

    Damn. Autozone turned out to be a trick. You get most of the way through ordering it, and then it errors out and says "one or more item in your cart is no longer available".
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  5. #30
    FEP Super Member erratic50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    4,575

    Default

    Check the mcparts sites. They were out there as little as 10 months ago for sure

    Verify your O2 harness is right for the computer. I seem to remember some pins being different AOD vs T5 and it can BBQ the ECU

  6. #31

    Default

    yeah, I plan to research the heck out of that.

    I complained to The Zone about my issue. We'll see if anything comes of it. I'll try other places too. I'd really like to avoid paying those prices on Ebay.

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  7. #32

    Default

    Very interesting. I've been researching the O2 harness question, and I'm finding that using an automatic ECU and harness with a manual car can cause IDLE PROBLEMS and CRUISE TO NOT WORK PROPERLY. Those have been ongoing problems with my car from the beginning!! It's pretty annoying having to research this via forums because there is SO much misinformation and unimportant crap you have to cut through to get to the helpful stuff. Ugh.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  8. #33
    FEP Super Member erratic50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    4,575

    Default

    Opinions are like butts, everyone has one.

    Where do you find the good opinions?

  9. #34

    Default

    Yeah, many of the posts go nowhere, many have tons of extinct photo links in them... plenty of "Great job, Bill!" to sift through... it's wonderful. Oh, and the fact that this is tied to converting speed density cars to MAF is great too. NOT doing that, DON'T care, let's move on.

    Here's what I could find, best that I can tell. I need to move the purple/yellow jumper from where it is to the open spot. That should solve all my problems.





    The page I got the photo from says it refers to a 1990MY harness, which is what I have. I guess I don't have much choice but to take his word for it. There was plenty of talk though of pin position and wire color changes throughout the years, so it won't be without drama. My harness DOES match the auto picture though.

    I hit up the websites for all the other parts store chains, and they pretty much alternate between "Call store for availability" (my FAVORITE!!)/"order online" greyed out, and "quantity not available" online/"order in store" greyed out. It seems that the bounty of these things that was available not that long ago has dried up. I still plan to visit the stores that wanted me to call them, but hopes are not high.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  10. #35
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Hang in there Brad. Your gonna love it man.

    That's it. I saw that stuff a while back. Ive tried the same way to go over the PhotoBucket Is Dead links when looking at NAVYCAT's issues. Those ECM pinouts allow an Auto and Manual wiring layout to be followed. It's mind bending how freakin' awkward it is to find consensus on if any given O2 wiring loom is the same or different to your stock 5.0 1990 Model year application unless you've got great pictures.

    The MAF 1990 Model Year Auto O2 wring loom is described in various ways. I think it's TECHNICALLY different based on transmission, but that's my A hole, um , opinion.

    The so called sensor wiring change is effectively by loop wire to allow another previous configuration to be used . Ford does stuff like that ALL THE TIME. Those Port EFi cars were churned out fast, so Ford did whatever it wanted to get 'em built. Everyone ARGUES over what they think are different O2 lines. Different is in definition.



    I've heard the idle issues are due to the mapping of the TFI for manual cars allowing a polling rate way below 500 rpm. Automatics are effectively dormant in terms of polling info below that figure. This is not opinion, but observed fact from Haystack.

    Ford designs the optional cruise control around non operation below 20 mph, and they then cut the idle down speed because the torque converter on automatic 5.0 HO's in LSC's and Mustang 5.0 autos is always 2350 rpm.

    Ford made everything specific for the application Brad. Before the truth sets you free, it messes you up royally.

  11. #36
    FEP Super Member erratic50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    4,575

    Default

    Reality is if the tuning program you pick lets you load the Cobra MAF table into another EEC-IV like your A9P and you adjust the injector size settings to 24 and CID to 306 you’ll be right in the ballpark.

    Doesnt take a lot to get that type of tune mail order. DirtyDirtyRacing offered such tunes on EBay and was quite reasonable. Comes on a board you shove into the J3 port or you can add a little more $$$ and get it on a Quarterhorse board which lets you pick between 3 modded tunes and the stock image

    He refuses to do tunes for “recalibrated” MAF meters, but will tune all day on the MAF setup you have. Don’t like the result, data long it with a wideband and he’ll send you an updated tune.

    Even does E85 tunes. Posts showed good results for fairly high HP small displacement motors. 400 HP premium fuel 440 HP E85 302. It takes a 47lb injector to get that from E85, so the tune has to be on point. Tough to get a 47 on a 302 to be happy with gasoline but doable and been done.

    I stopped my alternative fuel project on my 86 when the tax credit went away before I got it done. Others had succes with Willey’s help

  12. #37

    Default

    Yeah, it's just really hard to tell what you can even do with these things. The SCT website for example, is really vague and makes no mention, yay or nay, about many capabilities I would think it should have. I'm in a nice grey area where I know enough about it, i know some things to look for, but still don't understand most of the jargon used.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  13. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by erratic50 View Post
    Reality is if the tuning program you pick lets you load the Cobra MAF table into another EEC-IV like your A9P and you adjust the injector size settings to 24 and CID to 306 you’ll be right in the ballpark.

    Doesnt take a lot to get that type of tune mail order. DirtyDirtyRacing offered such tunes on EBay and was quite reasonable. Comes on a board you shove into the J3 port or you can add a little more $$$ and get it on a Quarterhorse board which lets you pick between 3 modded tunes and the stock image

    He refuses to do tunes for “recalibrated” MAF meters, but will tune all day on the MAF setup you have. Don’t like the result, data long it with a wideband and he’ll send you an updated tune.

    Even does E85 tunes. Posts showed good results for fairly high HP small displacement motors. 400 HP premium fuel 440 HP E85 302. It takes a 47lb injector to get that from E85, so the tune has to be on point. Tough to get a 47 on a 302 to be happy with gasoline but doable and been done.

    I stopped my alternative fuel project on my 86 when the tax credit went away before I got it done. Others had succes with Willey’s help
    Have you used send away tunes before?

    And this is a question for anybody, really i guess. Is a dyno tune even worth my time and money to do on an EEC-IV?

    I made further attempts to find a Cobra computer today, and no dice. Looks like they can't be had for less than $300. So that changes the game. I may just wait until I've got the engine assembled, try all the MAFs I have on hand and see what it does. I was wanting to get ahead of things, so I could have the most success right out the box, but it seems the only sure way to do that is to buy a Megasquirt. I'm not ready to commit to that expense unless I'm sure I need it. Erratic, you did say, plug the stuff in, it just may work.

    That difference in the MAF curve is what convinced me a Cobra computer was "needed", but like the MS, I'm not ready to commit to that expense unless I'm sure I need it.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  14. #39

    Default

    Yes, that is true, if you are using a Manual computer in an automatic, or vica-versa. I don't think it has to do with tuning as much as it has to do with how the computer recognizes it is in gear, or what is happening.

    Sitting at a stop sign, automatic in gear, more air is feed into the engine to keep the idle up (due to load). Same deal in a manual, there is no load so the computer can reduce the RPM. Manual in a Auto, it wants to die at intersections. Auto in a manual, the RPMs are too high.

    I fought this on my converted F150. When I figured it out I was able to use a relay to trick the computer by feeding it opposite what it was doing (neutral safety switch). This stopped the dying at intersections. Once I put in the auto computer it was all around better. You can trick it though.

    Just food for thought.
    Kenny

  15. #40

    Default

    Very interesting. I've been researching the O2 harness question, and I'm finding that using an automatic ECU and harness with a manual car can cause IDLE PROBLEMS and CRUISE TO NOT WORK PROPERLY. Those have been ongoing problems with my car from the beginning!! It's pretty annoying having to research this via forums because there is SO much misinformation and unimportant crap you have to cut through to get to the helpful stuff. Ugh.

    My answer:

    Yes, that is true, if you are using a Manual computer in an automatic, or vica-versa. I don't think it has to do with tuning as much as it has to do with how the computer recognizes it is in gear, or what is happening.

    Sitting at a stop sign, automatic in gear, more air is feed into the engine to keep the idle up (due to load). Same deal in a manual, there is no load so the computer can reduce the RPM. Manual in a Auto, it wants to die at intersections. Auto in a manual, the RPMs are too high.

    I fought this on my converted F150. When I figured it out I was able to use a relay to trick the computer by feeding it opposite what it was doing (neutral safety switch). This stopped the dying at intersections. Once I put in the auto computer it was all around better. You can trick it though.

    Just food for thought.
    Kenny

  16. #41

    Default

    Great info, thanks! I hadn't thought about it that way. I did have the dying at intersections when I first did the swap. I've done a bunch of mods since then, so now I'm sure it's all sorts of confused. I think I even turned that little screw that opens the throttle plate you're not supposed to touch.

    That's another big plus to going to the Cobra computer (which I may still do), running the right computer for the transmission I have.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  17. #42

    Default

    Alright, here's where we're at. Goody, goody, I got to make a spreadsheet.



    So, going line by line. "Cost", that's obvious. I would probably end up buying a dyno tune and chip/programmer only if I keep the A9P. X3Z, I would have to buy the ECU itself, but posssssibly only a pre-tuned chip. Megasquirt, those are pricey, but would probably not get a professional tune at all. The second two options may end up coming out about the same, cost-wise.

    Secondly we have "MAF/Parts match". I've seen that the Cobra MAF may not be happy working with the A9P. Plenty have said that if ECU and MAF don't match up, the car will never run right. I want to use the Cobra MAF, because 1) I already have it, and 2) it's a good match for my parts down the line, throttle body, intake, injectors, etc. Now, I've seen that if you buy a Quarterhorse or TwEECer, you can change the MAF transfer function in your ECU. There are downloadable files of various curves, but from what I can tell, nothing works right out of the box. You have to fiddle with it. Possibly for a very long time before you get it right. Can you take a short cut and do it on a dyno? I'm guessing not, but I don't know. That's a question I'll ask my tuner. Pretty much, it looks to me like using a Cobra MAF and ECU together would save me a lot of headache. And then, with the Megasquirt, it doesn't use the MAF at all, so it's a non-issue.

    “Future fiddling needed” is about the fact that I would (hopefully) get the car tuned once with the factory computers and be good going forward. The Megasquirt is supposed to be really user friendly and easy to learn, so I could look at tuning that myself to offset the cost of the unit itself. But that would involve fiddling. I chose SEFI because I didn't WANT to have to fiddle.

    “Reliability/durability” refers mostly to the fact that my A9P, while a known good part, is old. I've learned that during those years, EEC-IVs had these capacitors on them that have a finite lifespan and like to go bad. At least with a reman X3Z, they would have been renewed. And again, it would be a non-issue with the Megasquirt.

    “Band-aid solution for Trans” refers to the fact that the A9P is intended for an automatic and my car is a stick. I can fool it into being relatively happy running a stick car, but it will always be a band-aid. X3Z matches the manual trans, and Megasquirt can handle whatever.

    “306 vs. stroker” refers to the fact that I bought a 306 shortblock because it would confuse a computer expecting to run a 302 the least. The A9P and X3Z would be happy with this unmodified. If I went to a Megasquirt, it can handle whatever, so that means I missed an opportunity to go for a stroker for not much more money... which sucks.

    “Assured tune results” is about the fact that no matter what, a piggyback chip on a factory ECU may not yield satisfactory results. I know I can keep going back if I need to, but especially considering I'm relying on someone else to tune my engine on one visit to a dyno. Megasquirt, being much more powerful, it far more likely to yield good results.

    “Aggressive spark timing” refers to the rumor that A9P and A9L have more aggressive spark timing than the Cobra ECU from the get-go. Again, a non-issue with the Megasquirt.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  18. #43
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    MegaSquirt works by using a really good clock speed chip, and doing a "pre-frontal cortex leucotomy" on the AIR, EGR, and fault code system the EECIV has. That SAE and Fed Motor Vehicle standard stuff for many overstepped the mark for Electronic fun.

    In bucketloads of really good sources, the basemaps exist to get you where you need to go really fast. The wiring is easy, and if done right, it eliminates some of the stock Ford wiring disasters on what will be a 1978 to 1986 ish car here at Four Eyed. The actual results are based on the intelligence of your enquires, how good your follow up is, and how important the querries of your datalogs are answered by the person you get to help. For a person such as you, your enquiring nature will be openly rewarded. It's an open source, Speed Density EECIV style computer with a whole chunk of mystical junk DNA crud removed.

    As it is, the EECIV will self run in closed loop, and produce lean 15.1:1 air fuel ratios, and all that other emissions compliance stuff will self run pretty good.

    If its just a stock 5.0 with mods, a MAF equiped EECIV in good shape is able to be run well. The TFi system is well integrated into MegaSquirt 2E , but you do go backwards to partly bankfire from full SEFi. You can fully control it with EDIS8 run by MegaJolt. Its two steps ahead on being able to read volumetic efficency by the wide band sensor, and its very good at making an excellent data log, that removes a lot of chassis dyno time. Its two or three steps behind on the emissions and fault code side, but it gives you full scope for making it drive well if you do it right.

    The whole thing about MegaSquirt isn't just it being a Speed Desnity MAP, and shedding the MAF sensor, because the MAF tansform can be added to the lastest Version 3 as well. MS, its about being able to assume full control over everything on any engine, not just make a Port EFi Ford 5.0 from anything else.

    The later EECIV's are great if the wiring and systems play well together. The SCT or J3 plugged Moats, they all will do the modifications to closed and open loop if you follow the rules.

    The cost is based on how well someone sells you on there system.

    I like Fords EECIV and EECV because the MAF transforms can be gotten into, and Sailor Bob and others at EECIV.org have found a lot of great info that Ford would probably prefer not to expose. I like emissions compliance, the quirky way the EGR and AIR system works, and the way the TFi and EDIS8 ignition systems are embeded into the whole thing. There is a whole raft of what I call Junk DNA on the EECIV, with a whole bunch of nested crap that cannot be easily addressed, that works the way it needs to, even if its 35 years old. If the stock stuff is there. The moment you move away from stock, MS2E starts to look better.

    At the days end, the cost assesment is only an estimate, but EECIV will get you where you need to go, and MegaSquirt 2E will as well. Once you've made a commitment to either of those things above, you'll be glad you did. Your cost savings are in having ground support from MS2E. EECIV will fade but support won't vanish. It'll just get more hard core.

    On the DIY AutoTune description manual, you just have to deal with it. Re wording it, won't make it easier or harder. Its better just to deal with it, and understand the jargon. Others here will help you. Your not alone in a wilderness with any of the systems.

    Just pick something that ticks your logic, and move on, but set some benchmarks that are important. Fault codes for me are important because I like structure. Normally, when I've empolyed data gurus to help me out like I did when setting up my data loggers and my EECV transform for a Speed Density engine, the problems have been my own through lack of understanding something knew. Something older and commercially used has a lot more experts around to help.

    It's the fade and vanishing support you've gotta consider. Where will each of your four options be be in 5 or 10 years?

    IMHO, MS2E won't die because its got really good helpers. EECIV, its a little more limited, but there are some kick bu++ awesome Americans and Aussies and Kiwis who have made it really work. I love the 103 pin EECV because everyone is scared of the invasiveness of EECV, and thinks, wrongly, that its a bad idea to have the 25 and 50 thou leak tests and periodic operation functions happening on a non standard reflashed chip. Fly by wire accelerators worry people, for instance. EECV can be reflashed, and its just the fact that its exclusivley MAF, and embeded with Smart Lock and EDIS4, 6 and 8. Once its got that transform, you can do stuff Speed Desnity style with it. No-one has even touched on the fact that the Aussie 5.0 and 5.6 stuff from 1997 to 2002 was not fully OBDII EECV for many years, and its got some wicked cool chip upgrades that work really well with 248 to 335 hp tunes, and it is able to unearth a huge amount of extra torque for an a manual shift car. But again, its yet another choice, and its become sort of foreign now. But the support exists for it too from TI Performance and Rob Herrod. I think that any option will work within a moderate cost to you. Set a limit on how much you want to spend, police it, and have some fun making it happen. Others will want to follow you, and you'll not end up out of pocket because if its usefull, your time will have value to others as well.

  19. #44

    Default

    What is an MS2E? This is the thing I'm talking about:

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

    They make so many different things, I can't make heads or tails of any of the rest of it. Apparently the Stinger PiMP is a similar thing too, but i don't know what the difference is with that either.

    I do know, I'd want my ECU to be for the EEC-IV connector. I'd like whatever I change to be reversible.

    I plan to keep most of the emissions stuff, and am even adding cats back into the exhaust, mostly to quiet things down. They will be modern high flow cats though. AIR just seems like a stupid overly complicated mess to me, and it gives me a warm fuzzy that the high flow cats meet 49 state emissions standards WITHOUT that crap.

    It sounds to me like you like to tinker. Me, I can't wait to be done tinkering, at least with the engine. And messing with the MAF curve? That just seems like a frustrating nightmare. I want NO part of that! It'll be Cobra ECU with the MAF it's expecting or no MAF at all!

    I seem to remember now that you mention it that Megasquirts are bank fired. I don't like the sound of that either.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  20. #45
    FEP Super Member erratic50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    4,575

    Default

    Interesting stuff......

    One thing I thought about is that the EEC-V and the EEC-IV have extremely similar connectors. Back in the mid 90's there were plug and play kits out there that let you remove the 94-95 EEC-V and switch back to an EEC-IV and people did it for tuning reasons primarily. But that's back when nobody had done much of anything with an EEC-V. The Aussie stuff is the most modern computer system for a pushrod V8 when it comes down to it. It would be interesting to see what a skilled guy with access to the aussie stuff could whip up to modernize one the foxbody.


    DirtyDirtyRacing does tunes by mail on ebay last I knew and there were good reviews.

    I'd stay away from Bama mainly because I didn't have a good experience when I was initially talking to them about doing a 400 HP E85 setup for my 86GT. It was based upon 6 hole 47lb/hr injectors and they wanted absolutely nothing to do with it what-so-ever.


    One thing to keep in mind with the Cobra ECU -- you can get over a lot of lazy timing advance with more base advance. You have to walk a line so the engine doesn't start hard or run hot, but you can certainly pick up some of the "lost" power that way. Its my understanding that out of the box you'll see more low and mid torque with a stock Cobra setup but the peak numbers fall off slightly vs an A9L strategy unless you advance base timing.

    all things being what they are, I know when I went from SD to MAF I could absolutely feel the difference in low/mid torque and peak HP. My car was about 0.10 quicker in the 1/4 with a VM1 than it is with an A9L if I revved the pee out of it with the VM1, but its one hell of a lot more fun to drive after the conversion. Idles better. etc.

    You could always run the 70 with stock 19's and the A9P and keep your foot out of it. The moment you stand on it you're going to go to the stratosphere on lean numbers. You can compensate some with less timing (there's that again) or more fuel via more pressure (score) .... just know that has its drawbacks too. You'll go pig rich when you hit the key and it won't want to start right away. They always do start and its nothing more than a little annoying. It will run fat (rich) everywhere but WOT because the ECU will think its giving the engine less fuel that it actually is. You don't have to add a lot of pressure to even things out up top. Just a few PSI. Go too far and it will run worse than it would if you would just run 24's with the normal MAF calibration and an A9P and stock pressure -- talk about pig rich!!


    If you like to tinker but need help getting started I would for sure look up DirtyDirtyRacing and let them whip up a Moats Quarterhorse based J3 tune for your A9P. As you mess with stuff you can adjust stuff. Ive heard and seen a lot of good things about Binary Editor from Clint Garity -- a follow four eyed fox owner last I knew. If it were my money I'd plan to go BE and the datalogger software down the road. Initially I'd plan to have someone do my initial tune with an agreement that we would data log it and adjust via support over the phone, etc.

    Good luck with everything!!
    -- James

    Favorite thing I’ve said that’s been requoted: “"40 year old beercan on wheels with too much motor"

    My four eyed foxes:
    "Trigger" - 86 Mustang GT - Black with red interior. 5.0 T5 built as Z. Original motor ~1/2 million miles. 18 yr daily, 10 a toy
    "Silver" - 85 Mustang Saleen 1985-006? (Lol) Rare 1E silver GT / charcoal interior. The car is a little bit of a mystery. Current project bought as a roller, tons of Saleen / Racecraft pedigree

    Also in the stable - my son’s car. 1986 Mustang GT Convertible. Black/Black/Black conversion. 93 leather. VM1 ECU. T5Z

    past foxes -
    1989 Mustang LX Sport 5.0 AOD white/tan black top. Once I ran this one down I caught a wife.
    Wife also had a 1987 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe in the 90's.

    I'm a four eyed pride supporter, are you? Become one today!
    http://vb.foureyedpride.com/payments.php

  21. #46
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    There are many versions of Megasquirt. MS2 has two versions, an extra version allows sequential injection, launch control, the list goes on.The next versions are of the MS3X platform,but MS2v 3.57 is state of the art. The MAF sensor transform has been working with one version of this. I'm not advocating anything else but a stock with extras management system. Stinger PIMP is pretty good, though. Ford made the first port EFi 5.0 sequential using the TFi as a trigger, while the commercials were bank fire. The partly bank fire system with EDIS8 can work great. Feature for feature, the old SEFi is pretty good.Enjoy it!

  22. #47
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Below 3000rpm, and with the right dead time, bank fire can work great.

    Over 3 grand, everything behaves bank fire or continous anyway.Ford discovered what sequential injection had for real world low end torque starting with the 5.0 Fuelie Stang.

    In the trucks and heavier 5.8's with carbs, Ford planned to use the knock sensor. Since the SEFI cars were lighter cars like the Foxes, even the Lincoln Foxes, they werent worried about knock until a lot later.

    MAF with SEFi must have given Ford a lot of extra leeway for radical cams, knock resistance and Fed and Cali basin emissions compliance. The old bank fire trucks are often richer running, not super lean like a MAF passenger Stang 5.0 always is. In the Australian setting of urban sprawl and huge sales of Falcon taxis during the whole 90's era, the development of the Aussie non OBDII EECV was due to propane fuel use, and especially the total problems the formerly speed density EECIV six cylinder taxis had when suddenly asked to slap an Impco propane gas mixer on an EDIS 6 equiped, EECV, MAF Ford six. Ford back tracked to EECIV with a return to a TFi, yet kept the V8 EECV but with reduced OBDii functions. That means that Oz EECV is downward compatable to an EECiv Mustang.

    Hence the ancient Gold, Silver and Bronze PowerChip and other Unichip and Chip Torque etc versions offered in brown paper bags from them would run open loop settings for up 20% more power and 20 % more mid range torque on an already 30% more powerfull US import 5.0 V8 Explorer/Mountaineer V8.The factory rating for a SUV 5.0 was just 215 hp I think, but with the five versions in Australia with the various other MN12, Cobra, and then later day 5.0 HO cams , the engines grew quickly to 248, 268, 295 and 335, then you coould add a after market tune with another T5 or AOD trans destroying torque and power increase.

    Starting in 1988, and certainly by 2000, Shell and Texaco (Caltex) and BP were offering pump 95, 98 and 100 octane to match the Taxi cabs 99 octane propane gas aftermarket conversions, so stock 5.0's were running 9.4:1 compression ratios, low restriction singke exhausts, and 95 octane gas recomended from the factory, with a safe mode knock sensor for the odd fill with the accidental 91 octane.

  23. #48

    Default

    I notice that on American Muscle, BAMA says they cannot disable emissions functions. That may be just for liability reasons until you actually talk to them on the phone, but still, I don't like it. I think it's just the fact that I have a KOER code stored in memory for the AIR that I'm dealing with, not something more serious, but still. I'd like that out of there.

    BAMA also says they cannot program for aftermarket cams. That's a deal breaker right there.

    I do NOT want to tinker, but I do like the idea of being able to at least monitor sensors live if I want. I'm fairly certain the SCT Eliminator 6600 will do that, although not positive. With Moates, it requires at least the Quarterhorse and the F3 memory adapter. The Quarterhorse has a button battery on it that can die, so just having that is not a good way to store your tune long term. The battery dies, your tune is lost. For some reason there's yet another chip thingy that plugs into the quaterhorse and saves your tune, but it's not for installing into your ECU. And it costs another $75.

    I'd much rather have the thing dyno tuned, and be good going forward. No more tinkering.

    You know, I guess the more aggressive timing probably isn't really even a concern for me. How much power are we really talking about losing here? Like you say, the seat of the pants feel like you gained after the MAF conversion, that's what's really important to me. Real world power. I don't want to have to compromise day to day usability for the sake of a few ponies at WOT like setting the mechanical timing where it doesn't really want to be would do. I am not at all interested in "keeping my foot out of it".

    Right now, as things stand with the GT40 stuff on the engine, 24# injectors, A9P, and the "calibrated" C&L, it pings like mad when you get on it. I don't care for that. I always wondered if it was because of something I did wrong setting the mechanical timing.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  24. #49
    FEP Super Member erratic50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    4,575

    Default

    BAMA not playing if there's an aftermarket CAM. LOL. Just one of several in a long line of excuses about what they can't tune.

    I will grant them that for most combos that fat cam will lose power low and mid vs the stock cam with 1.7's for almost nothing up top and that fat cam often gets dragged down the 1320 by the guys who know better. Don't get me wrong, there are some good cams out there. But Ford did a great job of cam design on the HO in my opinion. To switch is to lose that. I'll only trust the custom grind world and guys from FTI with that one because of the ROI of one vs the other.

    Cranking up timing with a "calibrated" MAF and 24's without adding fuel pressure may be living just as dangerously up top as other combos using 19's and a bigger MAF without any tune to correct the situation.

    If it pings you don't want to know where your A/F ratio is most likely. 17+ probably.

    The pinging is the reason for popped head gaskets, etc, and also all that timing advance you have to give up everyone talks about with calibrated MAFs.

    She's starving for fuel up top with the added air the computer is too stupid to account for. The "fix" without tune that doesn't have poor startup consequences is simply using less timing.....

    Same deal with 19's and a "normal" 70 MM MAF, BTW. the problem is literally the MAF housing diameter vs the sensor in both cases.

    Great comments an suggestions by others on aftermarket ECUs. I may eventually go there. For now I'm not driving the car enough to justify the money spent doing it.

    Personally I love to run as much timing as possible because I like that 15-20% kick in the pants it yields. The thing to remember is advance is only a good thing when you don't go too far. 1/2 a degree too far is often worse for output than 2 degrees too little.

    Especially true with high swirl heads like my crappy E6 heads....

    Edelbrocks swirl like nobody's business too, FYI. That's how they get their low and mid torque numbers to look so beautiful.

  25. #50

    Default

    Haha, well good thing I won't be using that combo going forward. I hardly ever really got on it. Most drives in the past few years were just testing out some repair or driving in traffic to a car show. I'd really like to be able to have some fun with this thing.

    Yep, my new cam is FTI.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 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
  •