Batch to sequential fire fuel injection

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Jan 31, 2013 | 02:19 PM

Old Rusty

Thread Starter

Senior User

Joined: Nov 2011

Posts: 112

Likes: 1

From: Yelm, WA

Batch to sequential fire fuel injection

I have a 88 351 from a van and a 95 5.0 Mustang and am wondering how difficult it would be to use the sequential fire fuel injection from the mustang on the 351 that is batch fire.

Right now I have a 460 in my 66 LWB with a C6 and 2.75 gears with a locker rear and the gas mileage is poor. I am thinking of using the 351 because it should handle the tall gears better

Jan 31, 2013 | 03:15 PM

NumberDummy

Ford Parts Specialist

Joined: Nov 2006

Posts: 88,826

Likes: 787

From: Simi Valley, CA

Do you really think that the MPG will improve? If it does, it won't be any more than a paltry 2-3 MPG hwy. City MPG will remain the same.

These trucks have the aerodynamics of a brick, a gallon of regular gas back then was 19-23 cents, no one gave a hoot about MPG.

It amazes me that people buy full sized pickups, then expect them to get decent MPG.

My 1965 F100 352 stick 'n over averaged about 8-10 city, it was much better on the hwy due to the O/D.

My 2011 F150 5.0L Lariat Super Crew never got any better than 15 MPG hwy and I drive like Uncle Fudd.

Jan 31, 2013 | 05:58 PM

rustywheel68

Posting Guru

Joined: Mar 2006

Posts: 1,182

Likes: 1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Old Rusty

Right now I have a 460 in my 66 LWB with a C6 and 2.75 gears with a locker rear and the gas mileage is poor. I am thinking of using the 351 because it should handle the tall gears better

I may be missing something- but not sure i understand this part.
if you're having trouble handling tall gears, you'd need more torque.
the 460 should have waaaay more torque than the 351.

of course, the gas mileage on a carbed 460 is probably not as good as a fuel-injected 351.

there's no such thing as a free lunch.

Jan 31, 2013 | 10:55 PM

garbz2

Post Fiend

Joined: Nov 2000

Posts: 6,060

Likes: 7

From: Glendale Arizona

Quote:

Originally Posted by Old Rusty

The intake will not interchange due to the 351 being a tall deck block and wider than the 5.0 at the heads, however you should be able to adapt the mustang 5.0 harness and MAF along with the computer. It is a bit of work but will not gain you much of anything as the intake on the 351 is designed for down low power and torque with the long runners. Sequential will help clean up emissions but not improve the MPG..

Garbz

Feb 1, 2013 | 12:31 PM

Old Rusty

Thread Starter

Senior User

Joined: Nov 2011

Posts: 112

Likes: 1

From: Yelm, WA

I know the manifold would have to remain the same, Just wondering about the electronics. Since I have both motors sitting there. Also wondering why Ford used 2 different systems.

Having owned several Ford pickups and vans I know what to expect as far as mileage goes but there is also the weight of the 460 over the small blocks.

Feb 2, 2013 | 02:00 PM

garbz2

Post Fiend

Joined: Nov 2000

Posts: 6,060

Likes: 7

From: Glendale Arizona

Ford made the EFI intakes for trucks to produce maximum torque lower in the curve. Needed for towing and load capacity, something not required on a mustang.

Why are truck speed density and mustangs Mass air? one is simple and still works with limited programming the other is more tunable.

Garbz

Feb 2, 2013 | 09:26 PM

Old Rusty

Thread Starter

Senior User

Joined: Nov 2011

Posts: 112

Likes: 1

From: Yelm, WA

Thanks for the reply. I suppose the emission requirements for trucks and cars was different. I did note the 5.4 single overhead cam engine is sequential fire.