Still the same problem with EFI

[Gary Lewis]

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.

I think you may be ready for a real live test. Good luck!

[mat in tn]

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.

I do agree with Gary. time to run this thing. test the product not the theory.

as far as the camshaft goes. the specs on that cam are more lift than the factory cam yet it is close enough in size parameters to be marketed as stock replacement for a 351w. not a 302. remember that you have a modified 302. not a 351. there are dynamics here that exceed cubic inches.

poor man's 351? kind of. it will work differently actually. you may have been able to build a 351 cheaper. but building out of a 302 has performance benefits in the correct vehicle. it's lighter. spins faster. physically smaller (although not much).

had you built this as a carbureted vehicle then you would have been driving it already. and you may have spent more on wiring than a carb would have cost you. I do build both and do like both but I really love simplicity. and a 347 loves a carburetor!

but a 351w is bigger, heavier, and will be a much more "heavy duty" engine. larger crank journals which means more bearing surface to spread the load out across a wider area and it also has a larger oil pump drive shaft.

[ReneH]

I think you may be ready for a real live test. Good luck!

Thanks Gary, I will do...I don't know if I'm able to within the week or at the weekend.

[ReneH]

I do agree with Gary. time to run this thing. test the product not the theory.

as far as the camshaft goes. the specs on that cam are more lift than the factory cam yet it is close enough in size parameters to be marketed as stock replacement for a 351w. not a 302. remember that you have a modified 302. not a 351. there are dynamics here that exceed cubic inches.

poor man's 351? kind of. it will work differently actually. you may have been able to build a 351 cheaper. but building out of a 302 has performance benefits in the correct vehicle. it's lighter. spins faster. physically smaller (although not much).

had you built this as a carbureted vehicle then you would have been driving it already. and you may have spent more on wiring than a carb would have cost you. I do build both and do like both but I really love simplicity. and a 347 loves a carburetor!

but a 351w is bigger, heavier, and will be a much more "heavy duty" engine. larger crank journals which means more bearing surface to spread the load out across a wider area and it also has a larger oil pump drive shaft.

OK, you are right. My "description" was a bit faulty. Sure, I know that there are more differences as only the displacement, as you also have listed. It was not my intension to tune up the engine in this way it is now. But as I have had to rework the engine I have done these modifications like the stroker kit, cam and ECU to better adopt the stroker kit.

Here in germany it's very hard to get parts for 351W and it's much harder to get a block...so I stayed with my block. And you are also right regarding the carburetor, but you have to know that this car will be a dayli driver, so also in the winter. I already have two carburetored cars and wanted to try something new for this.

In my opinion the 80th Ford engines with the early injection-systems are the last ones you can easily rework and repair by your own.

So I also hope the injection saves some fuel...today my wife has paid 1.90 Euro for one liter of 95 octane gasoline...so...you can calculate the cost for a full 150 liter Bronco fuel tank...

I will drive 99 percent on normal streets. So my 4WD is only needed some days in winter. But I have to remark, that we haven't have snow since these days...

A bunch more engine power is nice, also if only for some overtake maneuver, but I never wanna build a dragster...at least not with this car...

I have bought the truck mainly for driving into holidays with my wife and the two kids. Modern cars, also if very big outside, have no space inside. The Bronco is optimal for this. I have had some new vehicles in the past. My last were two Ford Focus ST. Modern engine 250 PS out of 122cui...I could not drive this car lower than 23,5 mpg...

That's what they call "efficient". And while paying 400 EUR leasing per month and 600 Euros insurance per year...you can calculate by your self what I have payed after 3 years of leasing time...yes over 16,000 Euro. I've bought the Bronco for 17,000 Euro...so let's say there are some more mpg left to reach this yearly expenses...

So enough of my story...I will update you after the first run with new parts and wiring harness...

[mat in tn]

OK, you are right. My "description" was a bit faulty. Sure, I know that there are more differences as only the displacement, as you also have listed. It was not my intension to tune up the engine in this way it is now. But as I have had to rework the engine I have done these modifications like the stroker kit, cam and ECU to better adopt the stroker kit.

Here in germany it's very hard to get parts for 351W and it's much harder to get a block...so I stayed with my block. And you are also right regarding the carburetor, but you have to know that this car will be a dayli driver, so also in the winter. I already have two carburetored cars and wanted to try something new for this.

In my opinion the 80th Ford engines with the early injection-systems are the last ones you can easily rework and repair by your own.

So I also hope the injection saves some fuel...today my wife has paid 1.90 Euro for one liter of 95 octane gasoline...so...you can calculate the cost for a full 150 liter Bronco fuel tank...

I will drive 99 percent on normal streets. So my 4WD is only needed some days in winter. But I have to remark, that we haven't have snow since these days...

A bunch more engine power is nice, also if only for some overtake maneuver, but I never wanna build a dragster...at least not with this car...

I have bought the truck mainly for driving into holidays with my wife and the two kids. Modern cars, also if very big outside, have no space inside. The Bronco is optimal for this. I have had some new vehicles in the past. My last were two Ford Focus ST. Modern engine 250 PS out of 122cui...I could not drive this car lower than 23,5 mpg...

That's what they call "efficient". And while paying 400 EUR leasing per month and 600 Euros insurance per year...you can calculate by your self what I have payed after 3 years of leasing time...yes over 16,000 Euro. I've bought the Bronco for 17,000 Euro...so let's say there are some more mpg left to reach this yearly expenses...

So enough of my story...I will update you after the first run with new parts and wiring harness...

I believe we are saying much of the same things. even with the differences in translation. yes, efficiency is getting more important all the time. that said, I drive these trucks daily all year long. and mostly with a modified 5.0/302. with efi. I love it. my best mpg truck for sure! around town I get 15-17 mpg depending on how I drive. but on the highway, I was able to squeeze 19 mpg last fall driving to Maine and back. approx. 2k miles. I do not expect you to get the same from a 347. simple volumetric / afr differences. and then gearing etc.

[Gary Lewis]

OK, you are right. My "description" was a bit faulty. Sure, I know that there are more differences as only the displacement, as you also have listed. It was not my intension to tune up the engine in this way it is now. But as I have had to rework the engine I have done these modifications like the stroker kit, cam and ECU to better adopt the stroker kit.

Here in germany it's very hard to get parts for 351W and it's much harder to get a block...so I stayed with my block. And you are also right regarding the carburetor, but you have to know that this car will be a dayli driver, so also in the winter. I already have two carburetored cars and wanted to try something new for this.

In my opinion the 80th Ford engines with the early injection-systems are the last ones you can easily rework and repair by your own.

So I also hope the injection saves some fuel...today my wife has paid 1.90 Euro for one liter of 95 octane gasoline...so...you can calculate the cost for a full 150 liter Bronco fuel tank...

I will drive 99 percent on normal streets. So my 4WD is only needed some days in winter. But I have to remark, that we haven't have snow since these days...

A bunch more engine power is nice, also if only for some overtake maneuver, but I never wanna build a dragster...at least not with this car...

I have bought the truck mainly for driving into holidays with my wife and the two kids. Modern cars, also if very big outside, have no space inside. The Bronco is optimal for this. I have had some new vehicles in the past. My last were two Ford Focus ST. Modern engine 250 PS out of 122cui...I could not drive this car lower than 23,5 mpg...

That's what they call "efficient". And while paying 400 EUR leasing per month and 600 Euros insurance per year...you can calculate by your self what I have payed after 3 years of leasing time...yes over 16,000 Euro. I've bought the Bronco for 17,000 Euro...so let's say there are some more mpg left to reach this yearly expenses...

So enough of my story...I will update you after the first run with new parts and wiring harness...

I'm sure you'll be able to overtake easily, but watch out for the black Merc in the left lane. Every time I got in the left lane on the Autobahn that guy was on my rear bumper like a flash.

[ReneH]

I'm sure you'll be able to overtake easily, but watch out for the black Merc in the left lane. Every time I got in the left lane on the Autobahn that guy was on my rear bumper like a flash.

Yeah, welcome to Germany! That's why I hate to drive on German highways. The people here really think it makes a difference to drive 120 mph or even more and get faster to their aim. It's really no fun.

On the eight lane all seems to sneak and on the left all driving a race. I feel much better in Switzerland or France. It's no matter about driving very fast and get low at the construction sides every 80 miles or driving constant all the time. The only difference is the mpg over the whole distance...

I want to reach my aim in one piece and also chilled and not sweated...

[85lebaront2]

I'm sure you'll be able to overtake easily, but watch out for the black Merc in the left lane. Every time I got in the left lane on the Autobahn that guy was on my rear bumper like a flash.

Gary, you should have heard Matt's half brother relating an experience he had on the Autobahn. He was driving the 1982 S10 V6 4 speed his Father had given him while he was over there. He was cruising at about max speed for the S10 and came up on a roadster just sort of minding his own business, Jeff had just figured out what it was when up comes a "whale tail" Porsche who immediately starts trying to get the roadster to race him. After a bit, the roadster driver gives in and indicates he'll race the Porsche.

Jeff said the final clue was when the roadster driver shifted back into 2nd as he could see his right shoulder go down a bit then up as he went up over and down to get into 2nd (they're running about 80-85 mph at this point). He said the roadster driver signaled he was ready and the Porsche floored it, a bit of darker smoke, slight turbo whine, instantly drowned out by 7 liters of dual Holley Ford FE engine, as Jeff put it, dad, it sounded like your Shelby only louder.

He and his father asked around and found the Cobra was owned by a German citizen who had only recently gotten it back after a full restoration, including a complete engine overhaul, blueprint, balance etc. by Holman and Moody. Car was one of the 427SC models.

[Gary Lewis]

Gary, you should have heard Matt's half brother relating an experience he had on the Autobahn. He was driving the 1982 S10 V6 4 speed his Father had given him while he was over there. He was cruising at about max speed for the S10 and came up on a roadster just sort of minding his own business, Jeff had just figured out what it was when up comes a "whale tail" Porsche who immediately starts trying to get the roadster to race him. After a bit, the roadster driver gives in and indicates he'll race the Porsche.

Jeff said the final clue was when the roadster driver shifted back into 2nd as he could see his right shoulder go down a bit then up as he went up over and down to get into 2nd (they're running about 80-85 mph at this point). He said the roadster driver signaled he was ready and the Porsche floored it, a bit of darker smoke, slight turbo whine, instantly drowned out by 7 liters of dual Holley Ford FE engine, as Jeff put it, dad, it sounded like your Shelby only louder.

He and his father asked around and found the Cobra was owned by a German citizen who had only recently gotten it back after a full restoration, including a complete engine overhaul, blueprint, balance etc. by Holman and Moody. Car was one of the 427SC models.

Bill - That's quite an experience! I can only imagine what Holman and Moody did to it. My brother had a boat with a 351W in it and H&M logos all over it. That was the strongest boat we were ever around. He loved to bet a skier that he could take the rope away from them, and he never lost a bet.

So if a 5.8L was that strong, a 7.0L made for a roadster must have been something!

[Rusty_S85]

Just to check, you do know these fire all injectors at the same time for every pulse right?

I am saying this because cylinder 1 will have the injector fire four times with three firings being when the valve is closed.

I had to explain this to a guy at work with a '86 F150 I was finding which injectors were stuck from old gas, they couldnt believe every injector was firing every stroke for each cylinder.