JimJam300 Posted September 4, 2023 Share Posted September 4, 2023 A while back I purchased a new 33gal fuel tank for my Bronco and I wasn't thinking about converting to EFI. So now I got a stock style tank with the narrow sending unit port and no baffles. Can I still make this work? For sending units, it would be easiest to use the stock style I already have. There is a 2" sending unit for 85/86 on Bronco Graveyard but the resistance range is opposite for empty/full. So I guess the dilemma is whether I'm going with a fuel pump that I can mount to the sending unit in the tank, or an inline outside the tank. I'm not concerned about the noise issue with an external pump, it just needs to work without fuel starvation. I already got the return line figured out, just need to drill a hole and mount stainless plumbing on the tank (yay scrap bin at work). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Lewis Posted September 4, 2023 Share Posted September 4, 2023 A 2" sending unit should have the Bullnose resistance range. The range changed in '87 and I think by then all of the sending units were larger. But if it really does have the wrong range you can fix that with a MeterMatch - both Jim and I are running those. As for starvation, my '96 tank doesn't have baffles and I don't have any problems. I wouldn't worry about it. I think your 33 gallon tank will work fine with an external pump and plumbed-in return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Littlebeefy Posted September 4, 2023 Share Posted September 4, 2023 A 2" sending unit should have the Bullnose resistance range. The range changed in '87 and I think by then all of the sending units were larger. But if it really does have the wrong range you can fix that with a MeterMatch - both Jim and I are running those. As for starvation, my '96 tank doesn't have baffles and I don't have any problems. I wouldn't worry about it. I think your 33 gallon tank will work fine with an external pump and plumbed-in return. I used it for my EFI. I put in an Edelbrock Fuel Mat to avoid starving but that was probably overkill. If you use the pump hanger that looks like this, you can fit a Walbro 255 in there if you need the LPH (just need to pull out the included pump and trim some length of the connector that goes to the pump): Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArdWrknTrk Posted September 5, 2023 Share Posted September 5, 2023 For sending units, it would be easiest to use the stock style I already have. There is a 2" sending unit for 85/86 on Bronco Graveyard but the resistance range is opposite for empty/full. So I guess the dilemma is whether I'm going with a fuel pump that I can mount to the sending unit in the tank, or an inline outside the tank. I'm not concerned about the noise issue with an external pump, it just needs to work without fuel starvation. The resistance range and sweep didn't change until 1987 when the bricknose trucks got a new style cluster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimJam300 Posted September 5, 2023 Author Share Posted September 5, 2023 For sending units, it would be easiest to use the stock style I already have. There is a 2" sending unit for 85/86 on Bronco Graveyard but the resistance range is opposite for empty/full. So I guess the dilemma is whether I'm going with a fuel pump that I can mount to the sending unit in the tank, or an inline outside the tank. I'm not concerned about the noise issue with an external pump, it just needs to work without fuel starvation. The resistance range and sweep didn't change until 1987 when the bricknose trucks got a new style cluster. So this is what JBG lists Stock fuel sender 10 ohms full 90 ohms empty 85/86 sender/pump 70 ohms full 10 ohms empty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Lewis Posted September 5, 2023 Share Posted September 5, 2023 So this is what JBG lists Stock fuel sender 10 ohms full 90 ohms empty 85/86 sender/pump 70 ohms full 10 ohms empty Their catalog is wrong. They are right that the sending unit for the 85 & 86 EFI'd Broncos is E5TZ 9H307-A. But they are wrong about the ohms range. As Jim said, the change happened in '87 not '85. All Bullnose trucks use the same fuel gauge, E0TZ 9280-A, so the resistance cannot have changed. I don't know if JBG has the wrong part or just the wrong resistance, but I'm going to write them about their catalog and direct them to this post as their catalog is wrong in one way or another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Lewis Posted September 5, 2023 Share Posted September 5, 2023 Their catalog is wrong. They are right that the sending unit for the 85 & 86 EFI'd Broncos is E5TZ 9H307-A. But they are wrong about the ohms range. As Jim said, the change happened in '87 not '85. All Bullnose trucks use the same fuel gauge, E0TZ 9280-A, so the resistance cannot have changed. I don't know if JBG has the wrong part or just the wrong resistance, but I'm going to write them about their catalog and direct them to this post as their catalog is wrong in one way or another. Oops! I don't believe that unit has a 2" flange. Ford went to the larger opening when the EFI systems came out in order to get the pumps through. So I think their listing is messed up in yet another way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArdWrknTrk Posted September 5, 2023 Share Posted September 5, 2023 So this is what JBG lists Stock fuel sender 10 ohms full 90 ohms empty 85/86 sender/pump 70 ohms full 10 ohms empty JBG is wrong on that count. Fords specs are 10-73 ohms with an allowable deviation of 3. Note the last paragraph in this page from the EVTM. If there was a difference with the 85-86 sending units it is that is when Ford went to the larger tank bung to allow for in-tank pumps with the advent of 5.0 EFI. So the pickup/sender units are different, but the range is the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Littlebeefy Posted September 5, 2023 Share Posted September 5, 2023 Oops! I don't believe that unit has a 2" flange. Ford went to the larger opening when the EFI systems came out in order to get the pumps through. So I think their listing is messed up in yet another way. I'm 95% certain that the 33 gallon tank had a 2" sender hole for a few years after EFI came out. I believe the sender in the picture that I shared is for a 2" hole. I think they stayed with the 2" hole through 89 MY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Lewis Posted September 5, 2023 Share Posted September 5, 2023 Oops! I don't believe that unit has a 2" flange. Ford went to the larger opening when the EFI systems came out in order to get the pumps through. So I think their listing is messed up in yet another way. Ok, I've written them the message below and marked up their catalog page as well. We shall see what they say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts