Recommendations for EFI fuel system

[Littlebeefy]

Hi y'all,

I'm still in the planning stages for my 460 swap and need to work out a plan for the fuel system. I'm currently running a carbed 351w with the original fuel system (I think) and a 25 gallon tank. I'm putting an Edelbrock Pro-Flo 4 system on my 460 and the fuel requirements per the instructions are as follows:

The Pro-Flo 4 EFI system requires a high pressure fuel system providing 43-45 or 58-60 psi of fuel pressure with a minimum flow rating of 57 GPH (215 liter/hr).

Edelbrock also makes a fuel pressure regulator specifically for the Pro-Flo, so I have that resolved, but everything upstream of the pressure regulator is up in the air.

Edelbrock makes a couple of fuel pump options: https://www.edelbrock.com/shop/fuel-injection/fuel-system-kits.html

The simplest way seems to be to keep the entire stock system in place and use the Edelbrock fuel sump pump.

Another alternative is to replace the fuel tank with a later version that has the larger opening and use a later in-tank pump, but I'm not sure that would keep up with the fuel requirements of the EFI. I wouldn't mind upgrading to a 33 gallon tank, my 25 gallon tank probably has residue in it older than the current Billboard Charts topper, and my skid plate is bent so new parts wouldn't hurt.

Another option would be to piece a kit together. I don't have any idea what the best components would be in that case.

I'd be curious to hear from others on their experience, advice and recommendations.

Thanks!

Chad

 

[Gary Lewis]

Chad - Does the Eddy use a return? It looks like it from what I saw on that link, but I'm not sure.

The reason I ask is that you should consider going with a later style that has a built-in return. And if your tank has the small opening then you'll need a later tank.

So then you'll need to decide if you want the short-lived Bullnose ones or the later "fuel delivery module" style. The parts for the Bullnose ones are getting harder to find, but the FDM's were used for many more years, and more recently, so are available.

I'm using 90's tanks & FDM's, which you could do as well. You might or might not need the fuel pressure regulator, but you will need a way to change the fuel level sender to work with the Bullnose gauge, and a Meter Match will do that.

[Littlebeefy]

Chad - Does the Eddy use a return? It looks like it from what I saw on that link, but I'm not sure.

The reason I ask is that you should consider going with a later style that has a built-in return. And if your tank has the small opening then you'll need a later tank.

So then you'll need to decide if you want the short-lived Bullnose ones or the later "fuel delivery module" style. The parts for the Bullnose ones are getting harder to find, but the FDM's were used for many more years, and more recently, so are available.

I'm using 90's tanks & FDM's, which you could do as well. You might or might not need the fuel pressure regulator, but you will need a way to change the fuel level sender to work with the Bullnose gauge, and a Meter Match will do that.

Hi Gary,

Yes, it would require a return unless I used the sump pump (and then it may still require a return depending on who you believe). My first instinct was to switch over to the '90s fuel system as a whole. I just wasn't sure if the stock-style fuel pump met the necessary minimum flow and pressure requirements. Do you know what the stock spec is for those years?

If that isn't up to the task, does anyone know of a Holley or hi-performance aftermarket pump that will work in a 90s sender unit (or an 80s sender unit for that matter)?

 

[Gary Lewis]

Hi Gary,

Yes, it would require a return unless I used the sump pump (and then it may still require a return depending on who you believe). My first instinct was to switch over to the '90s fuel system as a whole. I just wasn't sure if the stock-style fuel pump met the necessary minimum flow and pressure requirements. Do you know what the stock spec is for those years?

If that isn't up to the task, does anyone know of a Holley or hi-performance aftermarket pump that will work in a 90s sender unit (or an 80s sender unit for that matter)?

I don't know the spec's, but I think Bill does. However the FDM's should have the volume needed because they handle the EFI engines just fine.

[Littlebeefy]

I don't know the spec's, but I think Bill does. However the FDM's should have the volume needed because they handle the EFI engines just fine.

I'm doubting that the stock EFI system had as high of a GPH demand as the Edelbrock unit (57 GPH). For the aftermarket stock-replacement units that I'm finding on Rockauto, where specs are provided they are showing a sub-50 max flow rate. I did find one that has an advertised max GPH of 57.5: https://www.rockauto.com/en/moreinfo.php?pk=7550060&cc=1106086&jsn=1299

So, hypothetically speaking, if I switch to a 90s tank setup, is there a Holley or other hi-performance fuel pump that will "bolt in" to the stock fittings?

[Gary Lewis]

I'm doubting that the stock EFI system had as high of a GPH demand as the Edelbrock unit (57 GPH). For the aftermarket stock-replacement units that I'm finding on Rockauto, where specs are provided they are showing a sub-50 max flow rate. I did find one that has an advertised max GPH of 57.5: https://www.rockauto.com/en/moreinfo.php?pk=7550060&cc=1106086&jsn=1299

So, hypothetically speaking, if I switch to a 90s tank setup, is there a Holley or other hi-performance fuel pump that will "bolt in" to the stock fittings?

I can see that the pressures could vary between EFI systems, but the engine will use the same amount of fuel regardless of the type of EFI installed, assuming that the same AFR is maintained. So the GPH requirements will be the same.

[Littlebeefy]

I can see that the pressures could vary between EFI systems, but the engine will use the same amount of fuel regardless of the type of EFI installed, assuming that the same AFR is maintained. So the GPH requirements will be the same.

You caught me talking out of school, Gary. I really don't know. It make benefit you to know that I'm making some slight performance modifications to the 460 before installation (the word "slight" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there). I'm using an RV style cam, but I expect to achieve a significant power improvement.

So I'm basing my assumption on Newtonian physics. Sure, driving down the highway at a fixed speed at 2500 RPM and all other things being equal, both EFI systems would have the same AFR rate because the work being done (and therefore the energy exhausted in the process) would be identical.

The difference is at the high-performance margin. If one engine produces higher torque, then it's maximum fuel flow demand must be higher at torque levels in excess of the other engines max performance; the maximum torque produced at the crank is higher and doing more work at it's max performance versus the lower torque engine and that difference in energy has to come from somewhere.

That is my assumption just based on what I know from Physics. So it would seem like I would need a higher max GPH pump for the higher performance engine, right? Hence the 57 GPH flow rate requirement for the eddy efi?

 

[Gary Lewis]

You caught me talking out of school, Gary. I really don't know. It make benefit you to know that I'm making some slight performance modifications to the 460 before installation (the word "slight" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there). I'm using an RV style cam, but I expect to achieve a significant power improvement.

So I'm basing my assumption on Newtonian physics. Sure, driving down the highway at a fixed speed at 2500 RPM and all other things being equal, both EFI systems would have the same AFR rate because the work being done (and therefore the energy exhausted in the process) would be identical.

The difference is at the high-performance margin. If one engine produces higher torque, then it's maximum fuel flow demand must be higher at torque levels in excess of the other engines max performance; the maximum torque produced at the crank is higher and doing more work at it's max performance versus the lower torque engine and that difference in energy has to come from somewhere.

That is my assumption just based on what I know from Physics. So it would seem like I would need a higher max GPH pump for the higher performance engine, right? Hence the 57 GPH flow rate requirement for the eddy efi?

Ahhh! That makes sense that even my 50-year old physics degree can get behind.

[Littlebeefy]

Ahhh! That makes sense that even my 50-year old physics degree can get behind.

Check this out. This company makes a 255LPH unit that is identical to the 92-96 unit:

https://www.highflowfuel.com/ag-1322007.1322032.1325965.1323249.1322152-automotive-1996-ford-bronco-5-8l.html

 

[ArdWrknTrk]

I'm doubting that the stock EFI system had as high of a GPH demand as the Edelbrock unit (57 GPH). For the aftermarket stock-replacement units that I'm finding on Rockauto, where specs are provided they are showing a sub-50 max flow rate. I did find one that has an advertised max GPH of 57.5: https://www.rockauto.com/en/moreinfo.php?pk=7550060&cc=1106086&jsn=1299

So, hypothetically speaking, if I switch to a 90s tank setup, is there a Holley or other hi-performance fuel pump that will "bolt in" to the stock fittings?

I think I pointed out in another thread that the stock in-tank pumps provide a minimum of a gallon a minute (spec, 1Qt in 15 seconds)

So 60 gallons an hour seems enough???