Bullnose Enthusiasts Forum

Fuel Injection System Musings

Classic

List

Threaded

60 messages Options

123

Gary Lewis

Fuel Injection System Musings

Administrator

Back in the early 70's I attended a set of classes hosted by Digital Equipment Corp (DEC) and I remember quite well their projection for the size and power of computers. It wouldn't be long before we could have computers in cars! And then I thought about how a computer could control the engine, and got excited.

Given that, I've been interested in EFI for a long time. So I wanted to start this thread about the various EFI systems out there, what they can do, how they work, etc. (Note: This is not a debate about whether EFI is better than a carb, or vice versa.) And I invite any of you to explain what you know about EFI systems, ask questions, etc.

I'll start. As many of you know, I'm following in Bill/85lebaront2's footsteps and installing a Ford EEC-V system in Big Blue. Yes, Ford did make an EEC-V system for the 460, but they only sold it in California and only in 1996 and '97.

So our systems are essentially "bolt in", although the wiring part of that is somewhat complex as you have to interface the EFI wiring with the Bullnose wiring. But this thread is about the EFI systems themselves so we will stay away from that issue.

But, you might ask what the differences are between EEC-IV and EEC-V systems for the 460. (Note that I specified "for the 460" as there are a lot of differences in other vehicles and with other engines.) Basically the IV systems are speed density, and that means the computer says "Since I know everything about the engine and its intake and exhaust systems, if I know the RPM then I know the amount of air that it is ingesting." However, if anything is changed then the computer doesn't know the amount of air.

But on the V systems there's a mass air flow (MAF) sensor that tells the computer how much air is coming in, so within reason you can make changes. And that's one of the reasons I'm going that way since the cam isn't stock and I'm running headers.

Speaking of MAF sensors, there are sensors and then there are sensors. Bill has been working on a spreadsheet of several of them, which is shown below. It shows the voltage output vs the air flow, which is important as an EEC-V ECU needs to know what the curve of the MAF sensor is.

But this brings up a question of mine: Most of these MAF sensors go to maximum output of 5.00 volts at ~600 CFM. So what happens when the voltage no longer increases but the RPM, and therefore the air flow, continues to go up? Does the computer continue to adjust the AFR based on the O₂ results?

Gary, AKA "Gary fellow": Profile

Dad's: '81 F150 Ranger XLT 4x4: Down for restomod: Full-roller "stroked 351M" w/Trick Flow heads & intake, EEC-V SEFI/E4OD/3.50 gears w/Kevlar clutches
Blue: 2015 F150 Platinum 4x4 SuperCrew wearing Blue Jeans & sporting a 3.5L EB & Max Tow
Big Blue: 1985 F250HD 4x4: 460/ZF5/3.55's, D60 w/Ox locker & 10.25 Sterling/Trutrac, Blue Top & Borgeson, & EEC-V MAF/SEFI

85lebaront2

Re: Fuel Injection System Musings

Administrator

A couple of things, first, the earlier Ford systems are what is called "speed density" these use a MAP (Manifold Absolute Pressure) sensor that along with a TPS (Throttle Position Sensor) and engine RPM let the computer decide how much fuel is needed. The other sensors used are ECT (Engine Coolant Temperature) sensor and IAT (Intake Air Temperature) sensor. These will modify the fuel program, richer with lower temperatures, leaner with higher temperatures. These systems were the EEC-IV (Electronic Engine Control 4)

The SD truck systems were all what is called "bank fired" meaning the injectors, even though there are 6 or 8 of them are fired in banks of either 3 or 4 depending on the engine. Supposedly the F100s with the 3.8L V6 had a TBI (Throttle Body Injection) system, but like carbureted 1985 5.0L V8s, are a unicorn. The V8s all were wired the same way, 4 end and 4 center injectors, and the 4.9L sixes were split odd and even (1,3,5 and 2,4,6). In 1994 Ford started MAF (Mass Air Flow) SEFI (Sequential Fuel Injection) on 5.0L with the AOD, AOD-E, 4R70W and E4OD transmissions, manual transmission and C6 transmission models stayed SD/BF. In 1995 the same changes were made to the 5.8L engine trucks. These 1994/1995 systems still used the EEC-IV computers

In 1996, OBD-II was mandated for all vehicles under 8500 lbs GVW, Ford introduced the EEC-V system which, as part of the Federal mandate, has a computer that can be "reflashed" by the dealers or anyone possessing the proper hardware and software. Prior to this, the only way to update the computer's programming was to replace it. Aftermarket companies came up with a workaround involving a piggyback tuner, examples being Moates Quarterhorse or TwEECer. The Moates unit is a board that fits inside the case and plugs into the main board where the J2 port (rubber or plastic plug) is opposite the 60 way connector, the TwEECer plugs in from the outside. One of the glitches with the TwEECer, if it comes loose with the ignition on, it can fry the computer. Advantage to the TwEECer and maybe the Moates is the ability to have multiple tunes available. Since the 7.5L engines were relegated the the over 8500 GVW trucks, other than California and some New England states, they remained OBD-I and still used the EEC-IV computers with SD/BF controls.

One of the improvements with OBD-II was the change from a single O2 sensor to dual O2 sensors for the control and a 3rd one post catalytic converter for measuring efficiency. The dual, or stereo as they are sometimes called is the ability to "tweak" the mixture on individual cylinders as the system is fast enough at lower RPM to determine which cylinder was too rich or lean.

Once the throttle is wide open, the system goes to a predetermine WOT program, no O2 input, essentially just rpm based using injector size, cylinder volume and a calculated air density to obtain 12.5:1 AFR (Air Fuel Ratio). On an SD system, the MAP sensor lets the computer know if the air flow is decreasing relative to the rpm as the pressure will slowly drop as the intake system approaches it's limits. The MAF will measure the air flow up to its designed limit (roughly 500 cfm for the 80mm on the 5.0 and 5.8L engines and 600 cfm for the 900mm on the 7.5L engines). Again the system at WOT runs off a set of tables of which the air density is based on what the MAF was reading, the rest are hard programmed into the computer.

Other than Ford, Chrysler used SD controls up into the mid 2000s and possibly later, GM uses a hybrid system, MAP sensor for low rpm sensitivity and an MAF for higher RPM control. Chrysler only used IAT on their turbocharged and intercooled engines for a long time. Ford also had some SD/SEFI systems on cars, most went away when the Mod Motors were introduced starting in 1991 on Lincoln Town Car and 1992 on Crown Victoria and Grand Marquis.

Bill AKA "LOBO" Profile

"Getting old is inevitable, growing up is optional" Darth Vader 1986 F350 460 converted to MAF/SEFI, E4OD 12X3 1/2 rear brakes, traction loc 3:55 gear, 160 amp 3G alternator Wife's 2011 Flex Limited Daily Driver 2009 Flex Limited with factory tow package Project car 1986 Chrysler LeBaron convertible 2.2L Turbo II, modified A413

Rembrant

Re: Fuel Injection System Musings

In reply to this post by Gary Lewis

Gary,

I saw a comment on one of the Facebook Bullnose groups the other day where a guy said, "Why on earth would anybody buy an archiac device like a carburetor when there are so many aftermarket EFI systems available that work so much better?". I didn't read the comments, but the obvious answer is price, if not simplicity, or both of those things together. I thought your thread was timely considering this was fresh in my mind from the past couple days.

Prior to me turning back in time and buying my 1984 Bullnose project in 2017, I had played around with ECU tuning in everything that I had owned for years previously. Anything that I could buy software for, I did, and used it too (Cars, and EFI motorcycles mostly). Problem is, the newer the vehicle is, the less improvements there are for the vehicle owner to make....you're basically left removing emissions tunes, or safety tunes (rev limiters or speed limiters). Still, they were fun to play with.

I may still install and aftermarket EFI system in my current project with the freshly rebuilt 5.0L engine. Time (and pocketbook) will tell. I will be installing a transmission controller for the 4R70W, and since there is no kickdown rod or cable like on older transmissions, I'll have to install a TPS on the side of the carburetor. That in itself has me thinking to just go with EFI, and make the complete jump...since the EFI TPS with interface with the transmission stand alone controller. Theoretically, they should work seamlessly together.

1994 F150 4x2 Flareside. 5.0 w/MAF, 4R70W, stock.
1984 F150 4X2 Flareside. Mild 302 w/ 5spd. Sold.
1980 F150 4X4 Flareside. 300i6 w/ 5spd. Sold in 2021.
1980 F100 4X2 Flareside. 351w/2bbl w/NP435. Sold in 1995

85lebaront2

Re: Fuel Injection System Musings

Administrator

I looked at the options when deciding what I wanted to do on Darth, in theory I could run an AOD with adapter behind a 460. Problem is 6400 lb truck that can tow 10,000 lbs + a load. Having owned a truck with a 300 and C4 and knowing that the AOD innards aren't much bigger than a C4 I knew I needed something beefier. I found in researching things that an E4OD is a wide ratio C6 with an OD gear set in front of that and a lock up torque converter. Problem #1, E4OD stands for Electronic 4 speed Overdrive, the key word being electronic. At a minimum it requires a stand alone controller which at the time I was researching it, only Baumann controls built one and it was at that point $1500.

I also wanted to resolve the issue with hard starting after sitting, hard to find in-tank fuel pumps, leaky valve cover gaskets, dual air pumps and affiliated plumbing, weak FS-6 AC compressor and a few other issues due to the shoehorn job Ford had to due fitting the 460 in that chassis. Additionally the damage where the previous owner "parked by feel". I discovered a friend had a 1990 F250 he wanted to sell, it had a problem with #5 cylinder using oil and had been told it was a problem with the cylinder head. We agreed on a price of $850 and he would deliver it from Virginia Beach to Newport News. It had good front sheet metal and the 460/E4OD combination. Win - Win.

I swapped the top end of the engine over after finding no problem with the heads (they had been rebuilt) Oil consumption was caused by bad rings in #5, which is a chronic problem on the SD/BF 460s probably due to fuel rail design, firing order and heat. I swapped the C6 for the E4OD, had the front half of the driveshaft shortened and stripped the 1990 truck as much as I could use. I was going to use the steering column and dash, but found that I could use a newer (1995/1996) dash and stub column along with the newer parking brake self adjusting pedal. This solved the computer to run the transmission issue. I was digging into tuning both engine and transmission using a TwEECer and was having a problem finding anything as far as what and how for tuning when I was contacted in a Yahoo group, EEC Tuner by one of the principles in Core Tuning LLC who sold me a package consisting of an EEC-V computer, tuning software and a cable to interface with an OBD-II test port so that is what I have, and what Gary has, except he doesn't need the E4OD capability.

Bill AKA "LOBO" Profile

Gary Lewis

Re: Fuel Injection System Musings

Administrator

Cory - I agree. Placing a TPS on a carb is crazy. Go EFI.

Bill - I don't need to control an E4OD - YET. But I have an E4OD bolted up behind the 400 in Dad's truck. And I own a TFI Cleveland intake with the injector bungs cast in, and with the M-Block to Cleveland adapters I plan to have a full MAF/SEFI 400. So Big Blue is the pilot program and Dad's truck will follow. Both will have OBD-II ports so my offspring can have them maintained.

And to speak to some of what Bill said, the EEC-V system can have the rear O2 sensor turned off, which I've done in my ECU. And it can have the crank sensor, EGR, AIR solenoids, and other things like that turned off, which I've done. So on Big Blue I'll be running a very plain vanilla EFI system with two O2 sensors, engine coolant temp, inlet air temp, and mass air flow inputs.

And once I get that figured out I'll create another ECU with similar parameters but turn on the E4OD controls for Dad's truck.

Gary, AKA "Gary fellow": Profile

ratdude747

Re: Fuel Injection System Musings

Keeping an eye on how Big Blue turns out in regards to EFI... Assuming I do end up with a 460 truck for a project, an EFI conversion is one possible route if the stock setup (or whatever it has) can't be made to work or is underwhelming. But I'm leaning more towards a sniper TBI and hyperspark ignition ($2000ish, but is a nice setup from the ones I've seen done already)... Don't get me wrong, I like my OBDII on the '95 Ranger, but the sniper ecosystem does have options to do a lot of the same stuff I'd be doing with OBDII (they even make 5" monitors to add to your dash!). And it's mostly bolt on and plug-and-play parts... biggest "pain" would be adding the wideband O2 (they give a clamp on solution, nah, I'd weld it).

1984 F150: 300 L6, AOD, RWD. EEC IV / TFI, Feedback Carter YFA Carb. Stock everything but radio (for now).

Gary Lewis

Re: Fuel Injection System Musings

Administrator

There are advantages and disadvantages to each of the many EFI solutions. But, from my understanding, only a factory system gives OBD-II. And I want my trucks to have that feature as I want my offspring to be able to have them maintained. (Not do it themselves, but have them maintained.)

Yes, the various aftermarket systems have the ability to connect some kind of device to them and find out what the problem is, but those are proprietary systems and I want the kids to be able to take the truck anywhere to have it serviced. So I've chosen to go with EEC-V - especially since Dad's truck has an E4OD that requires some kind of controller, which the EEC-V has.

But an aftermarket system would be easier to add on to an older vehicle if it didn't need the transmission controller. They come with a wiring harness, or harnii, and you put things in place and connect them up. Instead, I'm trying to figure out how to interface the new to the old. You could do it, but is that where you want to spend your time?

But, I'll bet that you can also make the carb system on that 460 work. It is a simple carb with a DS-II ignition system. However, the fuel system can be a pain depending on whether it has a mechanical fuel pump, which a few had, or the electric pumps.

Still, a TBI system, and especially one that controls the ignition, would be nice. Most of the advantages of port-injection EFI w/o the pain of individual injectors which require a special intake manifold, fuel rail, and wiring.

Gary, AKA "Gary fellow": Profile

Pete Whitstone

Re: Fuel Injection System Musings

In reply to this post by 85lebaront2

85lebaront2 wrote

Problem #1, E4OD stands for Electronic 4 speed Overdrive, the key word being electronic. At a minimum it requires a stand alone controller which at the time I was researching it, only Baumann controls built one and it was at that point $1500.

Not sure if you were looking at the Quick 2, 4 or 6, but I have the Quick 2 controlling my E4OD. I bought the controller, harness and a TPS for a Holley carb for $780 last fall, so these prices have come down considerably. I think the controller alone was about $540.

81 F150 Flareside, Edelbrock Pro Flow4 FI, hydraulic roller 351W, E4OD, 4x4, BW1356
92 F150 RCLB 351W E40D BW1356 mostly stock

85lebaront2

Re: Fuel Injection System Musings

Administrator

I do not believe any of those were out at the time I started planning this and executing it. I purchased the parts truck in March 2006 and started the serious execution in late 2010 and as I said, at the time it would require two separate aftermarket systems at roughly $1500 - $2000 each, then I would still have to purchase an E4OD. I also had to have a pair that could talk to each other.

Buying the 1990 F250 gave me a running package for $850 with the added advantage of front sheet metal and wiring harnesses. I took the 1990 rear chassis harness and added the 35" to make it fit a crew cab. After I had decided on using the 1996 interior I changed the front end from the 4 round 8 pin connectors and one round 4 large pin connector to the oval 24 pin one in the firewall.

The original continuous dash/front harness was replaced with the 1996 front harness with a 76 pin connector through the firewall to the 1996 dash harness. The EEC is mounted as close as I could get it to the 1992-97 location, almost in the left air box and it's 104 pin connector is right next to the 76 pin one.

Cost on a lot of this has come way down, but another consideration for me, I do not like TBI systems, they are nothing more than a pressure carburetor (WWII aircraft engine usage) and not true fuel injection.

Bill AKA "LOBO" Profile

ratdude747

Re: Fuel Injection System Musings

In reply to this post by Gary Lewis

My opinion: OBDII or not by the time your kids have it they'll have a fun trip finding someone willing to work on it either way. A lot of mechanics and shops frown upon dealing with somebody else's custom work... And the ones who do would likely be just as fine with an off the shelf Holley or Edelbrock kit. That said, part availability likely is better for the EEC-V setup... Pick your poison.

1984 F150: 300 L6, AOD, RWD. EEC IV / TFI, Feedback Carter YFA Carb. Stock everything but radio (for now).

Gary Lewis

Re: Fuel Injection System Musings

Administrator

Assuming the problem is with the EFI, which is all a scanner plugged into the OBD-II port would tell you about, then it won't be custom. It'll be a 1996 CA-spec 460, and the codes will be stock Ford ones, so that will tell the tech what the problem is.

Gary, AKA "Gary fellow": Profile

ratdude747

Re: Fuel Injection System Musings

On Sniper, there is no scanning... as the touchscreen pendant is part of the system. I'd have to look, but I'm pretty sure it has some form of diagnostics built in... but yeah, geared more towards petrolheads than general users.

1984 F150: 300 L6, AOD, RWD. EEC IV / TFI, Feedback Carter YFA Carb. Stock everything but radio (for now).

Gary Lewis

Re: Fuel Injection System Musings

Administrator

My son is a lawyer and not a gear head. My daughter is a to-be nurse and - not a gear head. Neither will be able to fix anything, but they'll be able to take it somewhere to be fixed. And around here we have general mechanics who have scan tools, things that say the O2 sensor is weak or the engine coolant temp sensor has failed. Those are the kinds of failures I'm expecting the OBD-II port to tell the mechanic about.

Gary, AKA "Gary fellow": Profile

Gary Lewis

Re: Fuel Injection System Musings

Administrator

Bill, and others, I'd like to pick your brains on MAF sensors and get some thoughts on the best approach for me.

Let me set the stage:

I have a used Motorcraft F5OF sensor and aluminum housing, which are the correct ones for a '96 F250 with EEC-V. I have no idea if the sensor works, but I've blasted and PC'd the casting to better than new.

I have a new Cardone 86-9524 sensor & housing that are said to be replacements for the F5OF. The sensor will fit on the Motorcraft housing that I've PC'd but the old sensor won't fit on the new housing.

I have a used XL3F-12B579-BA sensor and plastic housing on the way from ebay for $14. This was used on a Jaguar but is surely a Motorcraft since Ford owned Jag.

David found a "new takeoff" XL3F-12B579-BA sensor only for $18. Oddly enough, the pic below shows a profile of that sensor and the inlet air temp (IAT) sensor is clearly visible.

Now, to my questions. The F5OF is rated to 541 CFM and the XL3F is rated at 582 CFM. It seems reasonable to me that I should go with the XL3F. Right? (In that case I'll return the $85 Cardone unit.)

But, are all XL3F's the same? Will the IAT sensor be on the one I have coming in? If so is there an advantage to using that one - it looks like it will be more in the air stream than the one in the side of the air box.

Speaking of the one I ordered, it is due to arrive between now and Friday so I'll be able to answer that question firsthand then. But I wanted to get a discussion going.

Gary, AKA "Gary fellow": Profile

Rusty_S85

Re: Fuel Injection System Musings

In reply to this post by Rembrant

Rembrant wrote

Gary,

I saw a comment on one of the Facebook Bullnose groups the other day where a guy said, "Why on earth would anybody buy an archiac device like a carburetor when there are so many aftermarket EFI systems available that work so much better?". I didn't read the comments, but the obvious answer is price, if not simplicity, or both of those things together. I thought your thread was timely considering this was fresh in my mind from the past couple days.

Prior to me turning back in time and buying my 1984 Bullnose project in 2017, I had played around with ECU tuning in everything that I had owned for years previously. Anything that I could buy software for, I did, and used it too (Cars, and EFI motorcycles mostly). Problem is, the newer the vehicle is, the less improvements there are for the vehicle owner to make....you're basically left removing emissions tunes, or safety tunes (rev limiters or speed limiters). Still, they were fun to play with.

I may still install and aftermarket EFI system in my current project with the freshly rebuilt 5.0L engine. Time (and pocketbook) will tell. I will be installing a transmission controller for the 4R70W, and since there is no kickdown rod or cable like on older transmissions, I'll have to install a TPS on the side of the carburetor. That in itself has me thinking to just go with EFI, and make the complete jump...since the EFI TPS with interface with the transmission stand alone controller. Theoretically, they should work seamlessly together.

Price is a major determining factor but that price point will come down. When Holley introduced their aftermarket EFI that system was pushing $4,500 - $5,500 for the setup. You can now buy a Sniper or Sniper stealth EFI system for under $1,500 or you can buy their Terminator for roughly $1,500 that will plug and play with the OE ECC IV system but replace the Ford computer with the Holley computer that allows for easy tuning.

If my sniper Stealth doesnt provide me with what I need I may very well replace the unit with a Foxbody era factory EFI intake system and swap over to the Terminator wiring and computer system. I avoided that because for me it would end up being more work but I didnt triple check so I may have more work for myself anyways as far as throttle and kick down rod goes for my application which I wanted to avoid by going with a carb like TBI setup.

"Old Blue" - '56 Fairlane Town Sedan - 292-4V, Ford-O-Matic transmission, 3.22:1
'63 Belair 2dr sdn - 283-4V, Powerglide transmission, 4.56:1
'78 Cougar XR7 - 351-2V, FMX transmission, 2.75:1 9inch
"Bruno" - '82 F150 Flareside - 302-2V, C6 transmission, 2.75:1 9inch, 31x10.50-15 BFG KO2

85lebaront2

Re: Fuel Injection System Musings

Administrator

In reply to this post by Gary Lewis

First item, the XL3F-12B579-BA was also used on Mustang GT 4.6L, Trucks with the 5.4L (I one sitting here from my best friend's 2003 E250 5.4L). The XL3F has the IAT sensor built in, but I see no reason it could just not be used and keep the existing air filter mounted one. In the event the XL3F MAF doesn't work well, then switching back would be easy. Since the connector on the MAF has the four pins for the MAF in the center, and if the IAT is in it, the two unused end pins are installed and the harness connectors have provision for six pins with the two end ones blanked if not used. The E250 unit is inside the air filter assembly with an external round eight pin plug for connecting to the vehicle harness.

The tuning software has the provision to import a different MAF table. FWIW, the used F5OF unit I purchased on eBay is plastic but has the same actual sensor as the metal one. I am going to look for a connector for the MAF sensor with the built in IAT and add it onto Darth so I can use one of those MAFs and unplug the air filter IAT.

Bill AKA "LOBO" Profile

85lebaront2

Re: Fuel Injection System Musings

Administrator

In reply to this post by Rusty_S85

Rusty, the Holley Terminator, does it provide transmission control functions? I ask for two reasons, Rembrandt is planning on a 4R70 or 75W which is computer controlled and I have an E4OD in Darth.

With the EEC-V systems the computer can be tuned using the correct software and hardware.

Bill AKA "LOBO" Profile

Gary Lewis

Re: Fuel Injection System Musings

Administrator

In reply to this post by 85lebaront2

David - Thank you. It is slowly coming together. More later.

Bill - Thanks. I'm leaning to using the XL3F sensor that's coming in some time this week. But I don't think that sensor will fit the cast housing, so my work there might be for naught. We shall see.

And if it has the IAT sensor in it I might look for the right connector and use it instead of the other one. But that's more work, so we'll see what happens. Anyway, if you find a source for the connector please let me know.

Last, we'll have to have a conversation about loading MAF tables a bit farther down the road.

Gary, AKA "Gary fellow": Profile

85lebaront2

Re: Fuel Injection System Musings

Administrator

Gary, Motorcraft WPT-1091 is the 6 cavity MAF connector. This will allow either the XL3F or the F5OF to be used, just parallel the IAT sensor leads so either can be used, or just don't use the one in the MAF.

Bill AKA "LOBO" Profile

85lebaront2

Re: Fuel Injection System Musings

Administrator

In reply to this post by ratdude747

FWIW, I have my wideband O2 sensor on Darth where the factory single O2 sensor on the OBD-I EFI 460s is. With the E4OD it is back just in front of the catalytic converter flange.

Bill AKA "LOBO" Profile

123