ReneH Posted March 6, 2023 Author Share Posted March 6, 2023 Ok, don't forget there are several wiring changes from 1986 to 1987 and later. Hi Bill, I don't understand what you mean. For the ECU, I have used your 1987 Pinout list. The sensors seems to have the same connectors. The reason to change all these parts was, that my original setup already has done the same error. Nothing that I have changed solved this problem. It stays the same, no matter what I've replaced... So, that's the reason for me to target something that I have changed by reassembling the engine...only the cam stays left. My problem is, that the engine runs...very rich, but it runs...no backfire or other ignition problems...so actually also the cam can't be the problem... So maybe, that's what I don't know, the error was there from the beginning, when I've bought the car. Cause the setup I've bought have had so much deposits inside, two cylinders without compression and a wired exhaust construction, maybe the carbon stays inside and don't comes out of the tailpipe... Assuming this, only the ignition key circuit stays left untouched in my opinion... Cause if two different computers and two different distributors and also two different parts of each sensor all do the same, it can only be the wiring. But regarding the engine control harness, I also have changed it...so what's left? Oh, I forgot...my ECU gives on KOEO test an error 95 back...secondary fuel pump circuit...this error wasn't there before...I also get a bunch of errors from the emissions control parts...is there any way to fool the ECU that they are there? But this is optional and not so important, currently... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReneH Posted March 6, 2023 Author Share Posted March 6, 2023 Ok, don't forget there are several wiring changes from 1986 to 1987 and later. Ok...that's interesting...maybe I should crank more than 20 secs. And see what's happening... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReneH Posted March 6, 2023 Author Share Posted March 6, 2023 Ok...that's interesting...maybe I should crank more than 20 secs. And see what's happening... To Bill: it seems it is like I thought...the ECU knows if the engine is running... So maybe I should do the test with my old distributor by rotating it with a drill to get some rpm simulated...do you think this can work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
85lebaront2 Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 To Bill: it seems it is like I thought...the ECU knows if the engine is running... So maybe I should do the test with my old distributor by rotating it with a drill to get some rpm simulated...do you think this can work? That was my thought on the double pulse. Now, one other question, actually a couple. MAP sensor, is the vacuum line connected to a direct vacuum port on the manifold, it should be a 1/4" (roughly 7mm) line with no taps or restrictions? Second question, if you disconnect the vacuum from it with the engine running, does it change the running, either faster or slower and the obvious rich exhaust? If on the second one it improves slightly or no real change, then the MAP sensor is bad. On the fuel pump, we can try solving that later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReneH Posted March 6, 2023 Author Share Posted March 6, 2023 That was my thought on the double pulse. Now, one other question, actually a couple. MAP sensor, is the vacuum line connected to a direct vacuum port on the manifold, it should be a 1/4" (roughly 7mm) line with no taps or restrictions? Second question, if you disconnect the vacuum from it with the engine running, does it change the running, either faster or slower and the obvious rich exhaust? If on the second one it improves slightly or no real change, then the MAP sensor is bad. On the fuel pump, we can try solving that later. Hi Bill, Ok...Regarding to your questions about the MAP, you think I should run the engine and skip the test with the distributor driven by the drill... My MAP is also new. With the old wiring harness it has made no difference... About the connection of the vacuum line, I have to check. I have replaced the original lines 1:1 with silicone lines... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReneH Posted March 6, 2023 Author Share Posted March 6, 2023 Ok...that's interesting...maybe I should crank more than 20 secs. And see what's happening... So only for understanding my lack in translation: I have a MFI-fired system, cause not every single injector is triggered. MFI means: bank-fire. 4 injectors in parallel. So the book says that while cranking all 8 injectors firing simultaneously, two times per distributor full rotation...do I understand this right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
85lebaront2 Posted March 7, 2023 Share Posted March 7, 2023 So only for understanding my lack in translation: I have a MFI-fired system, cause not every single injector is triggered. MFI means: bank-fire. 4 injectors in parallel. So the book says that while cranking all 8 injectors firing simultaneously, two times per distributor full rotation...do I understand this right? Sorry, I was out in my garage working on my Chrysler convertible. I do understand, and you are correct on the MFI description, MFI standing for Multi-Point Fuel Injection. One thing in dealing with this, you have confirmed a suspicion I had regarding the starting mode on these systems as regards injector pulsing. On the vacuum line to the MAP sensor, the original ones Ford used were a fairly thick wall, reinforced rubber connecting a hard plastic line to the MAP sensor so it couldn't collapse at high vacuum. My Chrysler has a similar setup, except that it has a solenoid valve so it can check barometric pressure at idle by momentarily switching to an open to atmosphere source (needed so boost limit isn't exceeded). If your silicone rubber lines are soft, they may be collapsing and not giving a correct signal to the MAP sensor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mat in tn Posted March 7, 2023 Share Posted March 7, 2023 Sorry, I was out in my garage working on my Chrysler convertible. I do understand, and you are correct on the MFI description, MFI standing for Multi-Point Fuel Injection. One thing in dealing with this, you have confirmed a suspicion I had regarding the starting mode on these systems as regards injector pulsing. On the vacuum line to the MAP sensor, the original ones Ford used were a fairly thick wall, reinforced rubber connecting a hard plastic line to the MAP sensor so it couldn't collapse at high vacuum. My Chrysler has a similar setup, except that it has a solenoid valve so it can check barometric pressure at idle by momentarily switching to an open to atmosphere source (needed so boost limit isn't exceeded). If your silicone rubber lines are soft, they may be collapsing and not giving a correct signal to the MAP sensor. I'm scanning through but have not noticed a couple basics overlooked. the 351 distributor will not fit in the 302. it is taller and uses a larger oil pump shaft. they do the same thing just fitted to different sized parts. as far as firing order of the 351 cam, it is as simple as wiring the spark plugs accordingly. one thing that ford did in 1986 was to use the 5.8l cam in the 5.0 and calling it a 5.0 H.O. . the fitment is great. however, the cam that you have is an increased cam for the 5.8 and therefore a big increase for a 5.0/302. as for the electronics, I would use all things 302 unless the bank fire would double a cyl and skip another. remember that the ecu and all of the sensors have no idea what size engine they are on. only what afr, exhaust gas output, map and other sensors read. results are all they care about. in many cases hard parts need to be replaced in order for the proper range of operation to be measured. for example. if you were to have a colder thermostat then the ecu will never reach its most efficient range. if the cam overlap is " drafty" then it will allow raw fuel to get past. if the cam lowers manifold vacuum, then the map will always think the throttle is open or a leak exists. I'm afraid that you may have exceeded the ecu with your engine design. you certainly are pushing its limit. not a bad part or a bad build but not exactly compatible with fords management systems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReneH Posted March 7, 2023 Author Share Posted March 7, 2023 Sorry, I was out in my garage working on my Chrysler convertible. I do understand, and you are correct on the MFI description, MFI standing for Multi-Point Fuel Injection. One thing in dealing with this, you have confirmed a suspicion I had regarding the starting mode on these systems as regards injector pulsing. On the vacuum line to the MAP sensor, the original ones Ford used were a fairly thick wall, reinforced rubber connecting a hard plastic line to the MAP sensor so it couldn't collapse at high vacuum. My Chrysler has a similar setup, except that it has a solenoid valve so it can check barometric pressure at idle by momentarily switching to an open to atmosphere source (needed so boost limit isn't exceeded). If your silicone rubber lines are soft, they may be collapsing and not giving a correct signal to the MAP sensor. Hi Bill, I will check my setup regarding the vacuum lines. The silicon hoses I use are only specified for vacuum applications. As far as I remember, these silicon hoses (also when very felxible) are build for turbocharged systems in racing cars and able to resist very high vaccum without collapsing...but I will check the specs. So everyting points to run the engine and have connected a LED to each injector port of the ECU, to see what they do. Maybe it's time for "real-life" checking... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReneH Posted March 7, 2023 Author Share Posted March 7, 2023 I'm scanning through but have not noticed a couple basics overlooked. the 351 distributor will not fit in the 302. it is taller and uses a larger oil pump shaft. they do the same thing just fitted to different sized parts. as far as firing order of the 351 cam, it is as simple as wiring the spark plugs accordingly. one thing that ford did in 1986 was to use the 5.8l cam in the 5.0 and calling it a 5.0 H.O. . the fitment is great. however, the cam that you have is an increased cam for the 5.8 and therefore a big increase for a 5.0/302. as for the electronics, I would use all things 302 unless the bank fire would double a cyl and skip another. remember that the ecu and all of the sensors have no idea what size engine they are on. only what afr, exhaust gas output, map and other sensors read. results are all they care about. in many cases hard parts need to be replaced in order for the proper range of operation to be measured. for example. if you were to have a colder thermostat then the ecu will never reach its most efficient range. if the cam overlap is " drafty" then it will allow raw fuel to get past. if the cam lowers manifold vacuum, then the map will always think the throttle is open or a leak exists. I'm afraid that you may have exceeded the ecu with your engine design. you certainly are pushing its limit. not a bad part or a bad build but not exactly compatible with fords management systems. Hi, you are right about the distributor of 302 and 351W. I have overlooked one different number while comparing. About my cam: increased? summits writes "stock replacement":nabble_anim_confused: About my ECU: I have installed one from a 1989 351W. As far as I know the lookup tables are different to the 302 to manage the greater displacement, so the ECU of the 351W "thinks" it's installed in a 351W and controlls the engine like that. As I have a 347 stroker, I think my specs more at 351W than 302...that's the theory. I also still use the stock heads of the 302 and haven't done zero decking while reworking the engine block. As far as I know there are much more aggressive cams available, also as other modificated crankshafts, pistons, pushrods and rocker-arms to raise the compression rate, power, etc... So I hope, I'm not at its limits, at all. I think I only have build from my 302 a 351W for poor people... Maybe my current problem isn't a problem at all...more a problem of understanding how the ECU works while cranking and engine not running. So I will check what's happening, when the engine is running. If the both injector-ports are alternating instead of firing both ports two times a revolution, everything is fine. It's nearly three month ago as I have started the engine. Also my last tests, after replacing the distributor and some other parts were only with disconnected injectors and distributor cap off to see the rotation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts