Best FI for install/price

[Blittleton]

Dan,

I have installed 10-12 mass flo systems in the last year. I really enjoy the ease and customer service that the system has. Give me a call if you need any other help.

Bill

[Sizzler]

I've done one efi project already. Took a few years. Best years ever. Hunting, discussing, gathering and putting together a system is almost better than driving the end result.

I missed the process, the hunt, so I'm working on my next efi project:

Basically a Bud Moore 351C crossram to be mounted in an FE Algon adapter...


Using a Mallory TFI distributor with Ford EPEC programable EEC-IV computer...


Needed a TFI distributor...Mallory to the rescue...


Spare top for the BM crossram will serve as a template for a new top to mount the 2 hayabusa sets of throttle bodies (46mm each)...


The hayabusa throttle bodies come with injectors (will mill for automotive-type), fuel rails, TPS and vacuum hoses (probably lose those). Sized like they were designed for this application. Did I mention they're cheap?


Project almost looks ready to put together. Sorta bummed. Sorta like the building/hunting/gathering part of projects best.


At least I won't see the setup under every hood

Anyway, that's how I'm doing efi, this time. I'd like to hear more about this 'self-tuning' system. I can still change ECM's if something better actually comes around. But I've worked with so-called 'self-tuning', and, at least the ones I used, weren't. You still had to get the curves and tables close, and then the software optimized things for you. But I'm willing to learn new things, be told I'm full of it. So I'll wait for the actual facts and install. I'll slow down my project until I hear more.

The total cost so far is less than $1,000 (lots of swap meets and talking with people). Figure on another $1,000 for final machining, and miscellaneous parts (though I think I already have everything? I have a couple IAC's, box o' sensors, injectors...). I've talked with Troy Trepanier about making me a custom aircleaner/mass air meter mount, and even with that, I think the whole project will come in under $2,500.

what it would look like assembled (ignore the big hole in the center )...




Here you can see how an 87mm mass air meter fits nicely between the hayabusa throttle bodies. Their compactness really works, and did I mention they're cheap?




This shows how a standard FE 2x4 (or 3x2) aircleaner relates to this setup. Shorten it, widen it a little, and build in a mount to hold the mass air meter and it wouldn't look out of place. The only issue might be running throttle linkage across the intake. Thoughts on that include welding in tubing across the intake ducting (ala` Tunnelport ).


I'm liking this project because it'll put all the injection stuff on a plate, a plate that can easily be swapped for a carb plate if wanted/needed.

The only real question mark I'm still working on is whether to leave the injectors mounted in the throttle bodies or to try to weld in bungs to the Algon adapter or the Bud Moore base itself if the angles don't work (which will mean new fuel rails too).

So, another option you have, besides handing a box and a credit card to your installer, is to roll your own. Personally, I like a challenge.

[cobrarkc]

Sizzler What ECU are you using? Mass flo uses the Ford A9L from 89-93 5.0 mustangs. Is this going to be SEFI if so you will have to position the injectors over the ports. Are you going to cut out that Bud Moore top to mount the throttlebodies or make a new plate so you can switch it out with the carb top? I'd like to see one done for a Tunnelport do you think that is possible? The pushrod tubes are an issue. I am collecting parts now to make one based on the Mass Flo system for a Cleveland but would like to make one for a Tunnelport. The only way I see is to use throttlebodies with injectors but I would like to make make a SEFI system, any suggestions?

[Sizzler]

Factory Ford SVO had a EEC-IV ECU that you could buy direct from them. It was intended to piggyback on the existing EEC-IV. It was designed to piggyback and override the programming in your existing ECU. It was basically a fully-functional EEC-IV that was also fully programmable. It could also be used by itself, as a standalone ECU.



To port inject a tunnel port, I'd try a spider intake and mount the injectors back a ways from the ports and tubes, giving the sprayed mixture a good chance of getting into the 'flow'. Having the injectors smack bang next to the port isn't as critical as some might tell you. As long as they're in individual intake runners, well on the way to the port, they should work ok. But I haven't injected a tunnelport, so I don't know that from actual experience. I have injected an engine where the injectors were a solid 8 inches from the intake/head interface and that seems to work alright.

Good Luck

[cobrarkc]

Sizzler,
Is that EPEC system similar to the TWEECer systems?

[pmfranke]

Wow , you guy must be from another planet. Shur looks good. Art work, KEEP IT UP.

[Gatorac]

Originally Posted by buckthorne

Eric, at Performance Engineering in Ross, Ohio will be installing one of the first Dynatek systems on my 392 stroker within the next few weeks (I've been waiting months for production to begin)!!! Looks like a great system. Self learning based on conditions, etc. Supposed to be able to flow 2400cfm (like a 392 would need it) . Will be changing heads and side pipes at the same time with before and after chassis dyno runs. If I think of it, I'll update after I get it back in September.

Buckthorne

Please give us an update with pictures if you can.

[jetenginedoctor]

Originally Posted by Sizzler

Factory Ford SVO had a EEC-IV ECU that you could buy direct from them. It was intended to piggyback on the existing EEC-IV. It was designed to piggyback and override the programming in your existing ECU. It was basically a fully-functional EEC-IV that was also fully programmable. It could also be used by itself, as a standalone ECU.

The TwEECer R/T is money a lot better spent. The factory EEC-IV engine control strategy isn't difficult to work with if you take the time to read up on it a bit. For $550, you get all the programability you'll ever need in a MAF engine management system, and an almost unlimited CHEAP supply of replacement ECUs should you ever need one. In other words, I can put my hand on a working A9L ECU any day of the week for $100 or less. An SVO-EPEC is rare as hen's teeth, and relying on one for your car to run correctly is a big uh-oh if you actually DRIVE your car more than 100 miles from home.

To port inject a tunnel port, I'd try a spider intake and mount the injectors back a ways from the ports and tubes, giving the sprayed mixture a good chance of getting into the 'flow'. Having the injectors smack bang next to the port isn't as critical as some might tell you.

It's not a matter of being critical, it's a matter of being the smart way to do it. Putting the injectors further upstream from the intake valves increases the effect of port wetting (Tau) and makes tuning transients a huge pain in the ass. Furthermore, the injector fires on a stagnant air column far more than it does a moving column. The "importance" of firing the injector while the intake valve is open is simply not what many arm-chair engineers will try to tell you. Frankly, injector timing makes almost NO difference in performance, and very few tuners (much less OEM calibration engineers) have the equipment or understanding at their disposal to really get much out of manipulation of the injection phase events.

As long as they're in individual intake runners, well on the way to the port, they should work ok.

This really isn't true either. Because the injectors don't/won't/can't always fire into a column of intake charge headed past the intake valve and into the cylinder, there is a certain amount of fuel that will be carried into the plenum due to inlet charge reversion. The more aggressive the cam profile, the greater the charge reversion, especially at low engine speeds. Where this becomes a problem is the fact that you end up with a huge amount of cylinder-to-cylinder "charge robbing" that causes each individual cylinder to have wildly varying air/fuel ratios despite the fact that each has injectors firing the SAME amount of fuel into the inlet port. This will cause terrible idle and drivability issues that can only be tamed (partially) by adding a bunch more fuel to the calibration at those lower engine speeds resulting in fouled plugs, cylinder wall washdown, excessive fuel consumption, excessive emissions, etc. Bottom line, putting the injectors at the far end of the inlet port is simply not a good idea.

But I haven't injected a tunnelport, so I don't know that from actual experience. I have injected an engine where the injectors were a solid 8 inches from the intake/head interface and that seems to work alright.

Good Luck

I'd bet money that you were injecting into the plenum of a single plane 4bbl caburetor style intake manifold, right? Again, for the reasons mentioned above, it is a far better idea to fire the injectors onto the backs of the intake valves.

Brian Kennedy
BMEP Fuel & Tuning

[pmfranke]

your from texas close to another planet! I allmost understand what you are saying. Great more pictures!

[cobrarkc]

Brian,

Do you think that a tunnelport can be port injected using a single plane intake manifold? Maybe if you use a split pattern injector to shoot around the pushrod tube. Have you ever heard of someone port injecting one or can it only be done tbi?

[jetenginedoctor]

Originally Posted by cobrarkc

Brian,

Do you think that a tunnelport can be port injected using a single plane intake manifold? Maybe if you use a split pattern injector to shoot around the pushrod tube. Have you ever heard of someone port injecting one or can it only be done tbi?

There are injectors available that have a split spray pattern, but I honestly don't think that you'd ever know the difference whether the injector had a split pattern, cone pattern, etc. A true tunnel port engine is going to have so much port volume that it's going to be a dog at low RPM anyway, your best hope is to try to put the fuel into the intake runner as close to the intake valve as possible.

BK

[cobrarkc]

The reason I was asking about the slit pattern was to pace the injectors close to the valves but the pushrod tube in the manifold is right there and it will be spaying right at it which will cause wetting as it drips off the tube. I am planning on building a big cube 500+ engine so the tunnelport heads will not be such dogs at low rpm. I have a cleveland 4v headed stroker now and it's nothing like a stanrd stroke engine, they are dogs also at low rpm.

[Sizzler]

Originally Posted by jetenginedoctor

The TwEECer R/T is money a lot better spent. The factory EEC-IV engine control strategy isn't difficult to work with if you take the time to read up on it a bit. For $550, you get all the programability you'll ever need in a MAF engine management system, and an almost unlimited CHEAP supply of replacement ECUs should you ever need one. In other words, I can put my hand on a working A9L ECU any day of the week for $100 or less. An SVO-EPEC is rare as hen's teeth, and relying on one for your car to run correctly is a big uh-oh if you actually DRIVE your car more than 100 miles from home.

To make mine even rarer, it is the automatic version.

I have posted, above in this thread, and before: buy the ECM LAST. ECM's are changing and improving every day, from OEM's and the aftermarket. For your $550 TwEECer, I can buy two used version 6 FAST's. Either choice would work for someone like me, on the street, 100 miles or 1000 miles. The reason I have the EPEC is TwEECer came out and pretty much obsoleted it; doesn't mean it doesn't work. Doesn't mean that if it burns out I won't settle for anything other than an EPEC. Doesn't mean much of anything except it was cheap and it'll work as well as any A9L modified with the TwEECer system.

So again, this thread is titled "Best FI for the price" or something like that. Using that criteria, buy used, buy only what you need, and buy something that is supported or that you are able to handle yourself.

If you're not too familiar with the basic principals of efi, hire a tuner. If you want to learn or ARE familiar with efi, do it yourself.

Originally Posted by jetenginedoctor

It's not a matter of being critical, it's a matter of being the smart way to do it. Putting the injectors further upstream from the intake valves increases the effect of port wetting (Tau) and makes tuning transients a huge pain in the ass. Furthermore, the injector fires on a stagnant air column far more than it does a moving column. The "importance" of firing the injector while the intake valve is open is simply not what many arm-chair engineers will try to tell you. Frankly, injector timing makes almost NO difference in performance, and very few tuners (much less OEM calibration engineers) have the equipment or understanding at their disposal to really get much out of manipulation of the injection phase events.

Sequential efi from OEM's, and even the aftermarket, are only truly sequentially fired up to about 2,500 rpm. Above 2,500 rpm they usually go to bank-fire mode. So no, injector timing makes little difference. Did I say it did?

As for mounting the injectors high? Here's a factory Ford (racing) injection manifold for the tunnelport, with the injectors something like 8 inches above the head/intake interface...



Seemed to work alright.

That's not my intake. I have no association with it other than having paid attention to its progress from raw casting (from Dove) to being installed in a CAV GT-40.

I have injected a similiar intake for the FE. Not a tunnelport. My injectors are mounted at a similiar point on the intake. Frankly, I have NO idea what you're talking about "tuning transients" issues. Works fine. Actual experience talking here.

Originally Posted by jetenginedoctor

This really isn't true either. Because the injectors don't/won't/can't always fire into a column of intake charge headed past the intake valve and into the cylinder, there is a certain amount of fuel that will be carried into the plenum due to inlet charge reversion. The more aggressive the cam profile, the greater the charge reversion, especially at low engine speeds. Where this becomes a problem is the fact that you end up with a huge amount of cylinder-to-cylinder "charge robbing" that causes each individual cylinder to have wildly varying air/fuel ratios despite the fact that each has injectors firing the SAME amount of fuel into the inlet port. This will cause terrible idle and drivability issues that can only be tamed (partially) by adding a bunch more fuel to the calibration at those lower engine speeds resulting in fouled plugs, cylinder wall washdown, excessive fuel consumption, excessive emissions, etc. Bottom line, putting the injectors at the far end of the inlet port is simply not a good idea.

I have no idea what you're talking about here...is this about a throttle body system with the injectors mounted above a common plenum, basically an electronic carb? If so, then no, I don't think that's a good setup for the above reasons. For port injection, with the injectors mounted midway down the individual intake runners, it works.

Originally Posted by jetenginedoctor

I'd bet money that you were injecting into the plenum of a single plane 4bbl caburetor style intake manifold, right? Again, for the reasons mentioned above, it is a far better idea to fire the injectors onto the backs of the intake valves.

Brian Kennedy
BMEP Fuel & Tuning

You'd lose your money. See above. You seem to be a slave to conformity. My posts in this thread just say, don't believe everything the 'experts' tell you, sometimes they don't know everything, haven't seen everything.

Where 'experts' come in handy is, if you want a fast, simple, trouble-free install. They will open the boxes, wire things up, and load already tested maps into your system, and you'll be good to go. A LOT of people want that, and that kind of service is sought out. And I have no problem with those systems and people. I am merely presenting an alternative path.

.................................................. .................................................. ..

Again, not mine, I'm not associated with the install below in any way, and can provide no details about it other than it scares the bejebus out of its owner.




I'm out of this thread. Good luck to all.

[buckthorne]

Originally Posted by Gatorac

Please give us an update with pictures if you can.

Jim,
Still waiting on DynaTek to get their stuff put together and out to Eric. Sept. has come and gone, probably with the good weather (up here in the Great Lake State). I'm kinda bummed, and am waiting to get some warranty work done by Dynamic for coordination reasons.
Meanwhile I wait.....................

Buckthorne