Notices
1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks 1987 - 1996 Ford F-150, F-250, F-350 and larger pickups - including the 1997 heavy-duty F250/F350+ trucks
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

SD MAF Carb discussion.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #31  
Old 08-12-2011, 01:28 AM
Lead Head's Avatar
Lead Head
Lead Head is offline
Lead Driver
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 7,867
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by lew52
.....The mustang computer will run the 351 , the problem is that it won't run the trans , the 94-95 302s where SFI , MAF but i think most of them were 4R70Ws , so im not sure that it would work on a E40D ??...The 351 got MAF in 96 but that would be OBD II....Lew
Some 95 (Maybe 94 too ?) F-150 302 California Emissions MAF trucks came with an E4OD. I have no idea what dictated E4OD vs. 4R70W. I just know that those trucks exist, as we have a computer from one running my buddy's Turbo 460 F-250.

4R70W Computers will not operate E4ODs properly. The solenoid shift pattern is different, and E4OD computers have an additional coast-clutch solenoid output that 4R70W computers do not.
 
  #32  
Old 08-12-2011, 04:17 AM
lew52's Avatar
lew52
lew52 is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 4,558
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
^^^^ Thats some good info....Lew
 
  #33  
Old 08-12-2011, 07:38 AM
Conanski's Avatar
Conanski
Conanski is offline
FTE Legend
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 30,926
Likes: 0
Received 964 Likes on 763 Posts
Originally Posted by SideWinder4.9l
I just remembered you saying the factory 5.0 truck intake flowed pretty much as well as a aftermarket one.....To spend the money for other things...
Yes that's right, but unfortunately it doesn't apply here since we're talking about 5.8 based motors, the stock truck intake is much too small to support a 400 cubic inch stroker.
 
  #34  
Old 08-12-2011, 07:58 AM
1800joedaddy's Avatar
1800joedaddy
1800joedaddy is offline
Senior User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Gridley Ks
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Conanski
Yes that's right, but unfortunately it doesn't apply here since we're talking about 5.8 based motors, the stock truck intake is much too small to support a 400 cubic inch stroker.
Since we're brainstorming and learning, what about a big single plane efi intake with the tbs mounted vertically? I asked this in the sbf forum but it applies here as well. Maintenance and vc access would be worth doing it.
 
  #35  
Old 08-12-2011, 08:15 AM
Conanski's Avatar
Conanski
Conanski is offline
FTE Legend
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 30,926
Likes: 0
Received 964 Likes on 763 Posts
Originally Posted by 1800joedaddy
Since we're brainstorming and learning, what about a big single plane efi intake with the tbs mounted vertically? .
Yes that is a common thing to use, the Mustang guys often go that way with 351 based strokers simply because of the need for hood clearance, and because when you get to 400 cubic inches making TQ usually isn't an issue so a long runner intake isn't absolutely necessary.
 
  #36  
Old 08-12-2011, 08:28 AM
1800joedaddy's Avatar
1800joedaddy
1800joedaddy is offline
Senior User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Gridley Ks
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Conanski
Yes that is a common thing to use, the Mustang guys often go that way with 351 based strokers simply because of the need for hood clearance, and because when you get to 400 cubic inches making TQ usually isn't an issue so a long runner intake isn't absolutely necessary.
Outstanding! I would assume that putting 1 on a 5.0 you want something smaller to keep up velocity at low rpm or would it matter that much?

I'm actually quite eager to try this on my 5.0 since I have leaking vc's anyway.
 
  #37  
Old 08-12-2011, 09:16 AM
muscletruck7379's Avatar
muscletruck7379
muscletruck7379 is offline
Postmaster

Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Harrisburg, NE
Posts: 2,703
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
how about a 460 upper on an aftermarket intake?

Price motorsports has an adaptor (although its to put a carb onto an efi intake)
CS-460EFI

generally a longer runner with less cross section will favor more low rpm torque and short, fat runners favor High rpm horsepower. consider the 300, it has the same boreXstroke as a 400, but its cylinder head has ports smaller than a 302(although I believe that the average length is about the same). they have a reputation for being torquey as hell.

The megasquirt is a computer that you buy as a kit (a complete one is about twice as much as a kit), solder it together, and using some free software, you program it yourself. there are three versions: MS-I is just your basic fuel injection controller, MS-II (what i have) can also control ignition and has a few other perks (such as wideband capabilities), and MS-III's biggest thing is that it will do sequential EFI.

this is a picture of mine when i first got it

unfortunatly i didn't take any pics while building it, so i don't have anymore available right now, but I am planning on starting one for my capri, i'll take some pics of it. (I also still have wiring to do to the bronco, but it will have to wait until late december)

I will try to type up an intro-to-megasquirt thread, but i will probably drop it into the fuel system forum. i'll put a link here though.
 
  #38  
Old 08-12-2011, 09:41 AM
1800joedaddy's Avatar
1800joedaddy
1800joedaddy is offline
Senior User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Gridley Ks
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not bad, I pass on blown 460 trucks all the time. Are the TB's bigger or use the add?

The more I here about ms the more i want to try it.
 
  #39  
Old 08-12-2011, 12:28 PM
Conanski's Avatar
Conanski
Conanski is offline
FTE Legend
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 30,926
Likes: 0
Received 964 Likes on 763 Posts
Originally Posted by 1800joedaddy
I'm actually quite eager to try this on my 5.0 since I have leaking vc's anyway.
The 5.0 needs all the help it can get to generate any significant amount of torque under 2500rpm, so a long runner intake definitely helps here. If your motor is relatively stock swap on a Mustang 5.0HO intake instead, the runners are much smaller than the truck intake and almost as long, with this intake the HO made more TQ than any other 5.0 motor despite having a cam with 20deg more intake duration. Besides that a 5.0 intake will not fit a 5.8.. the block is taller and wider.
 
  #40  
Old 08-12-2011, 12:41 PM
muscletruck7379's Avatar
muscletruck7379
muscletruck7379 is offline
Postmaster

Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Harrisburg, NE
Posts: 2,703
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Conanski
The 5.0 needs all the help it can get to generate any significant amount of torque under 2500rpm, so a long runner intake definitely helps here. If your motor is relatively stock swap on a Mustang 5.0HO intake instead, the runners are much smaller than the truck intake and almost as long, with this intake the HO made more TQ than any other 5.0 motor despite having a cam with 20deg more intake duration. Besides that a 5.0 intake will not fit a 5.8.. the block is taller and wider.

There is an adapter, but good luck finding one (pointless not to just run a 5.8 manifold anyways)
 
  #41  
Old 08-12-2011, 06:27 PM
Ford_or_Nothing's Avatar
Ford_or_Nothing
Ford_or_Nothing is offline
New User
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SO conanski the 88 mustang 5.0 ho will run the 5.8 just fine and i can get rid of the bank firing injection?
 
  #42  
Old 08-13-2011, 10:39 AM
muscletruck7379's Avatar
muscletruck7379
muscletruck7379 is offline
Postmaster

Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Harrisburg, NE
Posts: 2,703
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
  #43  
Old 08-13-2011, 05:52 PM
Conanski's Avatar
Conanski
Conanski is offline
FTE Legend
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 30,926
Likes: 0
Received 964 Likes on 763 Posts
Originally Posted by Ford_or_Nothing
SO conanski the 88 mustang 5.0 ho will run the 5.8 just fine
No.. it probably won't run a 5.8 just fine, it's still SD and can't properly adjust to the flow demands of a larger engine. Batch fired injectors isn't the problem you think it is, it's no worse than a carb really.
 
  #44  
Old 08-16-2011, 09:10 AM
muscletruck7379's Avatar
muscletruck7379
muscletruck7379 is offline
Postmaster

Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Harrisburg, NE
Posts: 2,703
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
FYI - DIYautotune posted this on facebook today:

Would you guys like to help us build our Facebook fanbase by asking your car-buddies to fan us, if we rewarded everyone with a coupon that could be good for up to 25% off of any non-sale item in our store? (would be based on the number of new fans, the more fans we get added, the bigger the coupon)

that would knock a msIII to 270, a MSII to 200, and a MSI to 100 bucks!

I really want that MSIII...
 
  #45  
Old 08-16-2011, 11:14 AM
Edgethis's Avatar
Edgethis
Edgethis is online now
Lead Driver
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tobyhanma, PA
Posts: 6,304
Received 378 Likes on 284 Posts
I saw a kit to convert a 5.8 to MAF, had a new harness section and all new parts. I thionk it was around $800. I've thought about doing that in the near future. Does anyone have any experience with the pre-made MAF swap kits. I know junkyard sourcing is cheaper, but I was just curious...
 


Quick Reply: SD MAF Carb discussion.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:09 PM.