Click Here -> Please Consider Making a PayPal Contribution to the FordSix Forum!
2019 Contributors:
NJwpod, 1strodeo, mightynorseman, maxtrux, 6d7coupe, broncr, Phase3, 68Flareside240, bmbm40, mustang6, WorldChampGramp, justintendo, BigBlue94, ags290, motorsickle1130, Rooster, ousooner919, ethanperry, rzcrisis, DoctorC, jamyers, Motorboy, fastpat, Silverback280, chad, drag-200stang, THE FRENCHTOWN FLYER, Jimmys61falcon, rjonah, Sooshi, Robert92867, Invectivus


<<<***PLEASE READ*** New Site Update >>>

4.3 chevy tbi on a 200

Moderator: Mod Squad

Registered User
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 11:33 pm

4.3 chevy tbi on a 200

Post #1 by Badnews1 » Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:58 pm

I have a complete 4.3 TBI setup with ECU and wiring. Would it be a good swap onto a 200? And how well will it work with turbocharging?

User avatar
Registered User
Posts: 1362
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 11:25 pm
Location: Hurricane, WV

Re: 4.3 chevy tbi on a 200

Post #2 by rocklord » Mon Jan 25, 2016 9:52 am

From what I've read on using a complete TBI system from one vehicle to another is that the engines should have similar HP ratings. The 4.3L TBI has a HP range of 130-165 net; the 200 is 120HP gross/90HP net. Go ahead and install it, it may work fine. If it doesn't, look for a ECM from a 1986–1993 S10 with a 2.8L; they're rated for 120HP net. The 2.8 uses the same TBI as the 4.3.

Here is a link to a TBI conversion on a 250 in an early Bronco. ... hlight=250
He used a system from a 350 V8 truck (ECM #1227747) without any problems. This contradicts what I just stated in the last paragraph. That's why the 4.3 system may work with your 200.

Here's another site where someone installed a TBI system on a 225 slant six:
It has a little more information about installation and injector sizes.

As for turbocharging, most stock ECMs don't like boost. However, there's a lot of information on the internets about reprogramming stock systems for boost. Or you could switch the stock ECM out with a Megasquirt.

Hope this helps.

Currently Own
1965 Mustang, 200CID, 3Spd
1964 Corvair Coupe, 164CID, 140HP, 4Spd
1961 Corvair Lakewood wagon, 145CID, 80HP, 2Spd Powerglide Auto.
2020 BMW X3 M, 3.0L Dual Turbo, 473HP, 8-Spd Auto. 0-60mph 4.1sec; 174mph Top Speed.

Registered User
Posts: 1336
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 6:25 pm
Location: Carson City, NV

Re: 4.3 chevy tbi on a 200

Post #3 by bmbm40 » Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:03 pm

Scroll down about a third and see the post from larryejoh and his TBI install.
66 Bronco-1970 250, NV3550, DSII, 4 turn ps, uncut, 1" bl, 2.5" sl, front disc, twin stick D 20, 30 x 9.50
NEXT- direct mount 2v, power brakes, rear LS, 3G, electric fan, electric upgrades, custom curved DSII, header, 31" tires

New guy? Get the Falcon Performance Handbook and Ford six high performance parts from

Registered User
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 11:33 pm

Re: 4.3 chevy tbi on a 200

Post #4 by Badnews1 » Tue Jan 26, 2016 8:22 am


Registered User
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 11:33 pm

Re: 4.3 chevy tbi on a 200

Post #5 by Badnews1 » Thu Jan 28, 2016 8:14 pm

Been following some of the links, Man is there a ton of info out there. I have my car apart right now fixing more normal stuff, Extension housing bushing, Ball joints bushings tie rods, Rust, and you know the usual stuff. Can't decide if I wanna go ahead and turbo it or put headers on it first.......So many options.

User avatar
VIP Member
Posts: 7099
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 10:40 am
Location: PO Box 7072 Dunedin 9011,South Island, NEW ZEALAND

Re: 4.3 chevy tbi on a 200

Post #6 by xctasy » Sun Jan 31, 2016 6:29 pm

Badnews1 wrote:I have a complete 4.3 TBI setup with ECU and wiring. Would it be a good swap onto a 200? And how well will it work with turbocharging?

Badnews1 wrote:If you have a vacuum can on you HSI yes you will need it.

The 200 will purr right along up to about 7 grand if it's built for, My stock 200 likes to run about 80 on the hwy.

If you buy they Weber for a ford 200 you will not need to change jets And they are very simple to tune. That is one of the reasons they are so popular.

Yep. Even my 81 Fox 3.3 with 87 to 91 factory horsepower and a C3 auto and 2.73 gears woud love 80mph on a cruise, 95 mph at just 3600 rpm or more top wack, and its not as clean through the air as the 60 Falcon was. Even with cast rods, it still could top out at 60 mph at 5500 rpm in first with a 256 degree cam with 370 thou lift. But there is no extra power with those 1900 rpm from the 3600 rpm power peak.

The basics can make well over 8500 rpm if you
control oil splash with a good sump,
piston cracking and slap with a better than stock piston
and rod bolt to cam cheek and piston skirt interfereance with tight timing chain set.

Fords have the huge SBF lifter, so its no problem getting lift and duration up to the 470 thou and 280 degree mark where they really start to honk. Anyone here will tell you, the stock log, once opened up inducted suitably, camed, headered, and compressed, is an easy 185-220 hp engine if you look at kevinl1058 Crosely and FordSedanDelivery's work.

Oldtimers used to get the three and six carb sawn off log 144 and 155 versions of the little six up to that 8 and a half grand in hydroplane engines, and even four bearing 170 in liners are up over 280 hp at 6500 to 7000 rpm with triple Weber's.

Sadly, most people just don't want to do ignition and torque converter changes, and opt out for cams with insufficent duration, lift and carbs with too little venturi area. Its a recipe for a double whammy of disapointment. First, it ends up under camed, under carbed, improperly advanced, and then fails to meet the performance targets, and fuel economy nose dives. Quite why a 1.08 carb should work better than a 1.21 or 1.23 or 1.33 is due to the old algorthim below.


Timing (cam)
Then a Compresssion upgrade.

In that order.

My neighbour put a 1.33 Autolite 2100 2-bbl 390 FE carb on his 4.3 liter 265 Hemi Charger, and it did low 14's with an R/T cam, headers and a close ratio 351 Cleveland gearbox and a Camaro G92 axle with 3.7 gears.
My next door neigbour in 1986 with his in line Holden 202 puts a 2-bbl 350 cfm Holley with 1.19 venturs, headers and stck EFI 264 degree cam, and it does 200 hp. The Ford six in comparison is a latent, stuborn engine, somewhat like the flathead Ford 221 or 239. Every advance in breahting, Exhaust, Ignition, Gearing, Headwork, timing and compression results in moderate gains, but in all 7 Colors of the rainbow, you get absolute glory.

Ford engineers on purpose squeezed out carb area to a bare minimum on this engine, bcause if you reduce air flow, you stop the engine getting hammered. So the stock 200 lasts like no other. Put in a great breathing system, and you then start have problems with durablity of the other stock parts, even though they are pretty good. Ford rod bolts are a problem on all Fords for a start, and as Ak Miller started saying in the early 70's, Ford made the 200 and economy engine, reducing the casting quality when the Maverick came out. It is no longer an engine you can thrash like the early ones. So you have problems with rods and pistons and castings and breaking stuff when you lean on them that didn't happen with the 65 to 68 engines. You have to economically get into the engine and do some work before you break it.

For Small block Chev V6 or V8 Throttle Body Injection Cal Pack stuff MPG Mustang is the man.

TBI ex V8 SBC. CalPac redone by FASTEFI


Pretty much as good as two of the four cylinder Chrysler K car/TEMPO 2.3 CFi systems. As an example of what TBI can do if its got two injectors, Ford Australia used from 1988 to 1991 in the Aussie Falcon 3.2 and 3.9 OHC's. Good for an easy 165 hp at the flywheel. Good for Pinto 2000's or anything that had a 32/36 Weber or 5200. That system is EECIV based, but is actually a VQ30E Nissan Pathfinder V6 injection unit that Ford and Nissan organised together in 1986 under a co-op agreement, and can run off a Hitachi computer as well. It can be run with a Linc computer as well, or Megasquirt, and is similar to the primary injection system Mike Winterboer (AzCoupe) helped Scepter Performance fit to the Little Buddy 200 Mavrick during its 150 hp of nitrous escapde. ... -maverick/ ... ection.php

Or two of the throttle bodies, and you can feed a really good V8.

XEC Ltd ICBE's Inter Continental Ballistic Engines-
FAZER 6Bi (M112 & EEC5) or FAZER 6Ti (GT3582 & EEC5) 425 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
FAZER 6V0 3x2-BBL Holley 188 HP 3.3L/200 I-6 or 235 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
X-Flow Engine Components Ltd

Registered User
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 11:33 pm

Re: 4.3 chevy tbi on a 200

Post #7 by Badnews1 » Tue Feb 02, 2016 10:49 pm

thanks that is good info.

New Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2019 2:44 pm

Re: 4.3 chevy tbi on a 200

Post #8 by mtrujillo01 » Thu Nov 28, 2019 4:07 pm

Just curious about if you got it to work out or not... I have the same equipment and was thinking about doin it if it was possible. I’ve got a 68 mustang with the 200 inline and I have an 1988 Chevy Astro van with 4.3 Tbi as well as a 1993 Chevy Astro with 4.3 tbi... any info or update would be awesome.

Registered User
Posts: 97
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 4:29 pm

Re: 4.3 chevy tbi on a 200

Post #9 by jimmyv65 » Sun Dec 01, 2019 11:28 am

I did this on my 250 on a Bronco. I used the 4.3L TBI and control it with Megasquirt.

1966 Bronco-'78 250-Meagsquirted TBI, DUI, Header, Cam, Hydroboost & Front Disc, Uncut, 1" body lift, 2.0" suspension lift

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests