• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Fuel Injection vs. Carburation
#1
Has anyone else gone the route of foregoing normal aspiration in favor of fuel injection? I am taking a long hard look at all my options for this car and I certainly want the best drivability and performance I can get out of my Cleveland.

Thoughts and suggestions on a system?

But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. James 3:17 (KJV)

[Image: 2member12162.png]
  Reply
#2
Personally.........
I think injection is a nice idea... if you had all of the components at hand.
For a part-time driver car, Dad's Tiger knocks down 20+mpg and it is bone stock with the addition of a controlled leak for a 4V carb and cast iron intake. It has zero issues, whether driveability, heat, starting, etc. Keep in mind, too, that the modern ethanol BS in the gasoline is not friendly to standard carbed components.

My 5.0 is also bone stock. It too knocks down some nice, 20mpg-ish cruising mileage. It too has no issues.. But, I can see if/when something does malfunction (IAC valve, throttle body, injectors, O2 sensor, etc.), the repair cost will surely be more than any carbed repair that I can think of.

Again, IMO, if you're a gadget freak, go for the injection. If you're a cheap, old skool sucker like me, stick with the carb. I really don't think there's a clear cut answer.

Pete - MotoArts Decals and Signs
'71 Sportsroof 351C-4V/4-speed - FINALLY under construction - no, wait, on hold again...
'90 Mustang 7-Up 5.0 ragtop, rolling beater
'66 Sunbeam Tiger Mk.IA, survivor
  Reply
#3
Mr. Mac - Fuel Injection is one modification to my 351C that I would like to try as well. It is just so expensive. I have read several good reviews of the Professional Products Powerjection system: http://www.summitracing.com/parts/PFS-70026/

Mesozoic has a EFI system on one of his vehicles and he may have some advice on the matter.

Let us know how it goes for you.
  Reply
#4
This reminds me of an old thread where downwardspiral made his own fuel injection setup.

http://www.7173mustangs.com/thread-megas...megasquirt

Jayson
[Image: 36319488731_8f2a376549_z.jpg]
73 Mach 1 Mustang
89 Dodge Shadow ES
94 Jeep Wrangler

  Reply
#5
My thoughts...

I had a throttle body injection (holley projection) on my mustang for a while. Ran pretty good overall. From a drivability/mpg point of view here is my order (worse to best)

1. Carb
2. Throttle body injection
3. Port injection (simultainious)
4. Port injection (batch)
5. Port injection (sequential)
6. Direct injection

My recommendation is if you are going to go fuel injection, go big. Don't just do Throttle body injection (TBI). While you may be able to tune it 'better' than a carb it still suffers from the same basic problem: Wet Manifold. Both a Carb and TBI mix the fuel into the air as it enters the intake manifold. Since the path to each Cyl is a different length and has curves the mixture that reaches the cyl is different for each cyl and will also vary with RPM. They try to design it so the paths are the same as possible and the curves as smooth as possible but in the end they are different. This means you tune to the most lean cyl. Every other cyl is getting 'a little more' fuel. So while you can get some improved drivability with TBI (somewhat depending on the kit, what inputs it has, who tuned it) you still have the wet manifold.

Wet manifolds are not a problem with port injection. The injector is right at the intake port. (Some would argue this is still a 'wet' system compared to direct injection). But you can shoot the exact amount of fuel needed right at the intake and get a much more consistent mixture from cyl to cyl. sequential is the preferred method since it times the fuel shot for each individual cyl.

Of course, our year motors were not designed for port fuel injection. That doesn't mean it won't work but a more modern engine is optimized for port fuel injection. The head design will take into consideration the location of the injector and will, all things being equal, be better than a head/engine that wasn't designed for port fuel injection.

That all being said, if I was going to return to fuel injection I would go port fuel injection and focus on a system that is sequential. The downside is they tend to be expensive, you will not recover the cost in increased mpg.

Also, there are carb setups (webers) that, while wet manifold, are configured in such a way that it is minimized. And the look really cool too.. Wink

Anyways, that's my 2 cents. I am not an expert. I have run carbs and Throttle bodies on my Mustangs. I have done a lot of research on this but don't have any hands on experience with port fuel injection on a 71 to 73 mustang.


'Mike'
73 Convertible - 351C/4V CC heads/4bolt/forged flat tops/comp 270/rhodes/mallory unilite/tri-power/hookers/glasspacks/c6/3.50 limited slip/Gear Vendors/Global West sub frames, strut rods and shelby style traction bars/ Rear sway bar/tilt steering (not original)

Pics of modifications included in:
  Reply
#6
The cost/benefit ratio is not there unless money is not an issue and you are going to drive the car 12K a year for a long time. Just an opinion. Chuck
  Reply
#7
c9zx;37544 Wrote:The cost/benefit ratio is not there unless money is not an issue and you are going to drive the car 12K a year for a long time. Just an opinion. Chuck

+1 You're right on the money Chuck!

[Image: 386_07_10_13_5_58_42.jpeg]
My Mustangs:
71 M-code Mach 1, Medium Blue/White Sport, 4R70W, 3L50, Factory Ram Air.
72 Q-code Mach 1, Pewter/Black Sport, 4-spd, 3L25.
65 Convertible, Britney Blue/White/White, more modified than original.
05 Convertible, Legend Lime/Tan/Tan, future classic??
  Reply
#8
c9zx;37544 Wrote:The cost/benefit ratio is not there unless money is not an issue and you are going to drive the car 12K a year for a long time. Just an opinion. Chuck

I agree. Buy the proper carb for your application, get a wideband O2 meter and learn to tune it. You can actually get better mileage on the highway with a carb than with fuel injection.

73 conv. 460, D0VE large valve heads, Performer RPM manifold, Voodoo 227/233 cam, Holley 950 HP carb, C6 trans, 3.25 trak-loc.
  Reply
#9
The 'best' tuned carb will not get better milage than the 'best' tuned sequential port injection on the highway. The difference may be negligable but the wet manifold will make it all but impossible to deliver consistent air/fuel to all 8 cyl. Now, I am splitting hairs and it all is dependent on each system running as well as it can.

However, I totally agree that carbs are the way to go with our old iron. Port injection is going to run you a couple of grand if you do most of it yourself and almost double for a 'kit'. There is just no pay off in performance and no guarentee of results.

'Mike'
73 Convertible - 351C/4V CC heads/4bolt/forged flat tops/comp 270/rhodes/mallory unilite/tri-power/hookers/glasspacks/c6/3.50 limited slip/Gear Vendors/Global West sub frames, strut rods and shelby style traction bars/ Rear sway bar/tilt steering (not original)

Pics of modifications included in:
  Reply
#10
I have been doing a bit of reading both here and elsewhere and am starting to wonder if I shouldn't just proceed from where I am and just swap out the stock intake for a better one. I currently have a set of 2V heads (which I read have better low end torque) and that Holley sitting atop a Ford intake manifold (I'll try to get my son to get pictures of it all for verification of exactly what parts are installed). To be honest, right now I really don't know what I have as everything came to a screeching halt when they told me my job was going away and to go find a new one!
[Image: DSCN1534.jpg]

For a streetable Cleveland with decent take-off power I'm thinking that just cleaning it all up (to include a carb kit) staying with the 2Vs and adding a better camshaft and intake might just be the ticket to success. Or should I drop down to a 650 CFM Holley? Questions, questions, questions!

But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. James 3:17 (KJV)

[Image: 2member12162.png]
  Reply
Share Thread:  


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  fuel sender 1/2 inch OzCoupe72 5 225 04-22-2018, 10:05 PM
Last Post: OzCoupe72
  quick fuel jpaz 48 1,565 04-20-2018, 08:17 PM
Last Post: jpaz
  Electric Fan(s) and Fuel Pump Recommendations EdM 8 451 03-21-2018, 02:17 PM
Last Post: mustang7173
runninpony Fuel Pump Fitting NOT A T5 23 1,191 09-10-2017, 07:09 PM
Last Post: Stanglover
  Locking Fuel Neck or Gas Cap BrandonDindorf 2 567 05-11-2017, 04:20 AM
Last Post: Silverback
  750 or 830 cfm Quick Fuel Carb EBSTANG 32 1,961 05-03-2017, 09:05 PM
Last Post: EBSTANG
  Brake and fuel line routing Bondobax 0 502 05-02-2017, 06:21 PM
Last Post: Bondobax
  Gas tank modification for larger fuel lines Jeff73Mach1 11 904 04-09-2017, 10:52 AM
Last Post: Jeff73Mach1



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)