I am planning on swapping my 390 to a 1988 302 efi out of a Crown Vic. I was just wondering if anyone knows if the inline efi pumps would pull enough fuel out of my tank not to starve the engine. I have read the spec article on doing this and he recommends using a booster pump which I don't understand because once the line is primed it should feed the pump plenty of fuel right? I would appreciate any other tips or tricks on this conversion. thanks in advance , Brandon

 

Welcome to the FTE forum!

I installed a 4.6L MOD motor from a Crown Vic last year into my 65 F-100. I used an inline Holley EFI pump that is controlled by the Ford EEC V controller. I mounted the pump close to the tank and purchased a high pressure filter, since I am filtering the fuel after the high pressure pump. I have no other pumps and so far not one problem with the set up.

I mounted a fuel tank below the box and did not use the tank in the cab as I did not want to deal with a return line in the cab and did not want to listen to the fuel slosh around.

I hope your swap goes well and post lots of info as you complete the swap.

Jeff

 

No. In line stock ford HP pumps do not pull fuel. That is why a booster pump is needed.

Unless it is mounted near the tank and gravity feeding from the bottom of the tank they will not push anything.

The ford system for 1988 in cars and trucks uses a primary low pressure pump in the tank and a secondary high pressure pump near the engine to boost it to the required pressure as set by the bypass regulator. The EFI 302 will also need a return line back to the tank.

I run a ford system in my 64 on the 472 but i gravity feed the pump from a custom 30 gallon than i have in the bed. It does starve a bit when i really get on it and have the wiring in place to add a primary low pressure pump at the tank.

Garbz

 

In the August 09 issue of Classic Trucks magazine there is an article "Fun with Fuel Injection" that shows the installation of an inline fuel pump and return line fabrication on a Chevy truck. If you're going to keep the tank behind the seat, I don't know why this setup wouldn't work for a Ford too. As a bonus there are a couple of really cool Bumpsides in this issue too.
I'm trying to explore as much of this fuel injection stuff as I can because I'm sure one day the 352 in my 66 will give up and I wanna be ready with some good ideas for upgrades.

 

Hey Garbz, because of some recent developments which I'll share later, I'm revisiting this topic. If someone wanted to used the stock in-cab tank with an EFI conversion, could a bung for a new gas line be welded in at the bottom of the tank near the edge of the drivers seat then dropped thru the floor next to the stock one to gravity feed a high-pressure inline pump, thus eliminating the need for a pre-pump? Could the existing stock fuel line that screws into the top of the tank be used for the return line? Of course, all necessary precautions must be taken for welding on a used gas tank.

In a previous post, I referred to an article in Classic Truck Magazine that modified the stock tank for an EFI conversion Ls Gas Tank External Fuel Pump Install Stock Fuel Lines Photo 4 But your comment about gravity feed for the high pressure inline pump made me wonder if this other idea would work.

Thanks.
Randy

 

Depending on what system and year you are using some do not have a return line.

You could use the fuel supply as a return as there is no check valve in it. I would not weld anything to an old tank. New tanks are only 2 bills.

What system are you thinking of using?

Garbz

 

Thanks for the response, Garbz! I have access to the complete drivetrain/harness/computer, etc from a 92 Mustang GT 5.0/AOD with 62K original miles. That system requires a return line as you probably know. Don't know if I want to bother with the tank under the bed thing right now cause I'm still not satisfied with the filler location options.
Is there such a thing as a quiet inline fuel pump? Could a seal-proof bung be added that didn't require welding?

 

Use a small aftermarket sucker type pump on your stock fuel feed. Little square ones from older subraus works awesome.

Feed from this in to a spin on canister type filter. But don't use the filter. This will be a vessel for fuel when demand peaks.

Place the stock ford pump from a 86 to 89 truck on the rail as the primary pump. Tis setup will be fairly quiet.

For the return line place a line in to the tank by using the tank fill tube. You can easily solder a return lune in to the fill tube. Use Steel line and make a connection near the tube. run the line at a 90 in the tube with about enough line to reach half way down the tank.

Garbz

 

Not knowledge on this swap as of yet; but can't one used say a 70-72 incab tank from a F100; they have a return line I beleive? Just a thought.

 

They have an emissions vapor port. You could use this but it would spray fuel at the top of the tank. above the fuel level. This would cause excessive fumes and would vent through the fill cap?

Garbz

 

Hmmmm.....that doesn't sound very desirable...


Someone else I spoke to also suggested the possibility of running a return line in through the sending unit but I haven't checked the feasibility of that yet...

 

Some do, some do not. It all depends if the F100 has the Evaporative Emission (Evap/Em) System...or not.

Evap/Em introduced in 1970, was mandatory in all sold new in CA: Passenger Cars, F100's, Bronco's and Econolines.

How many other states required Evap/Em in 1970/72 besides CA? I dunno and I doubt either of y'all do either.

1970/72 F100 with Evap/Em required: A port in the fuel tank used w/the fuel tank vent expansion tank* / charcoal cannister / unleaded fuel / non vented fuel cap that has 4 "ears" (staggered, 2 above, 2 180 degrees apart below) / restricted fuel filler tube.

This 4 eared non vented cap will only fit into the fuel filler tube that has a restrictor in it. Back then, gas station nozzles came in two sizes, the restrictor only allowed the smaller in diameter unleaded fuel nozzle to fit in.

No port in the tank, no expansion tank, no 4 eared non vented fuel cap, no restrictor in the filler tube, no charcoal cannister, no unleaded fuel = NO Evap/Em!

* 1970: The tank mounts on the inside of the cab, butted up against the left B piller, above the fuel filler tube. 1971/72: The tank is just composed of tubes, mounts inside the cab above the center of the fuel tank.

For those of you that have the 1964/72 Ford Truck Parts Catalog, look here: 1970 F100 = Illustration Section 90 ~ Page 28 // 1971/72 F100 = Illustration Section 90 ~ Page 44.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOTZ-9002-A (replaced C1TZ-9002-K) .. 19 1/2" Gallon In-Cab Fuel Tank / Reproduced

Applications: 1961/69 F100/800 / 1970/72 F100 without Evap/Em / 1970/72 F250/750.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOTZ-9002-C .. 18 1/2 Gallon In-Cab Fuel Tank / Obsolete

Application: 1970 F100 with Evap/Em.
------------------------------------
D1TZ-9002-A .. 18 1/2" Gallon In-Cab Fuel Tank / Obsolete

Applications: 1971/72 F100 with Evap/Em.

 

Just thought you could returned into filler neck port or evapor insert! But you guys are the smart ones; I'm just a thinker!
Being in a military town we get alot of trucks from varies states; that have all your emission control crap; so trucks are possible to be in our area from out west!

 

Sold new in CA: The DSO code stamped on the Warranty Plate will be either 71 or 72.

Some peeps knocked the restrictors from the filler tubes, so they could use leaded fuel, cuz it was cheaper and much more readily available.

But, were unaware that leaded fuel melted the charcoal inside the cannister, rendering Evap/Em non operative.

When catalytic converters were introduced (1975 cars/Bronco, some 1977 E/F100/350's), some peeps knocked out the restrictors so they could use leaded fuel.

But...guess what? They were unaware that the leaded fuel melted the charcoal inside the converter, shoved it into the muffler.

It wasn't too long before their vehicles sounded like vacuum cleaners headin' on down the road!

Wasn't too long afterwards that their vehicles died along the side of the road. Muffler clogged up with melted charcoal!

Back then CA smog tested all 1950 and newer vehicles. If they didn't pass, they couldn't be registered.

Peeps were soon very sorry that they knocked out the restrictors, cuz they had to buy a new muffler, new converter(s), new restricted fuel filler tube(s), new charcoal cannister. 500 buck's minimum, not including labor.

 

in installing a 5.o into a 74 van, i used the 86 bronco pump, did not need a low presure pump to feed it, you will want a return line though