Some stupid questions about modifying EEC-4

Moderator: Mod Squad

motzingg
Registered User
Posts: 815
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:16 am

Some stupid questions about modifying EEC-4

Post #1 by motzingg » Thu Oct 30, 2014 5:13 pm

xstacy i'm lookin' at you buddy!

I've read through a bunch of threads on here and on EEC Tuner forums but i'm just not getting the info that i need. Sorry as i'm sure this is redundant or i'm dense or both.

I just got into a conversation at work with a guy who is looking for some options for tuning his mildly modified 5.0 mustang (91) and it got me back into doing some research. He and I were trying to figure out how hard it would be to do minimal table mods to an otherwise stock EEC-IV and I started thinking about some stuff i've seen posted on here and that perhaps if he and I went in on the software and tuning tools together, I could make it work for my project.

So, first off, i understand the batch/sequential fire thing in theory, in implementation does the 300 use two banks or just one? How is it configured if it uses 2 banks? Does the sequential fire make a significant difference on this engine? The eec5 went to sequential on the V8's but i cant find if the 6's were sequential as well, or if they just went to MAF control scheme.

second, is a daughterboard like 'quarterhorse' mandatory or can the tuning be done (without logging or re-write, realtime programming) by burning chips and 'guess and check' with something like Paul Booth's program? Is it just so cumbersome nobody does it?

Any other tips for getting your feet wet in EEC4?

E4ODnut
Registered User
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 2:18 am
Location: Gibsons, BC, Canada

Re: Some stupid questions about modifying EEC-4

Post #2 by E4ODnut » Thu Oct 30, 2014 10:00 pm

The EEC-IV is a very universal controller and there are hundreds, if not thousands of individual configurations. In order to develop a hack to modify any one of these configurations someone has to spend a lot of time and effort to reverse engineer what Ford did and how they did it. Consequently development is usually limited to the most popular configurations, like the 5.0L Mustangs. For these engines there seems to be a fair amount of information available and the daughter boards can work quite well. However, if you have a 460, or a non Lightning 5.8 or a 4.9 there is little if anything available, or at least nothing that I have found.

If you do find anything for the 4.9 please post it as I would be most interested to study it.
Robert
'95 E-150, 4.9L, E4OD, Megasquirt
'92 Winnebago Elante 33RQ, 7.5L, E4OD, Megasquirt
'93 Bayliner 3288, Twin 5.8L Windsors, converted to tuned port EFI, Megasquirt

motzingg
Registered User
Posts: 815
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:16 am

Re: Some stupid questions about modifying EEC-4

Post #3 by motzingg » Fri Oct 31, 2014 12:34 pm

yeah i've gone through that rigamaroll with an Escort several years ago, no definition had been hacked.

I was under the impression that the quarterhorse didn't need that, but upon further research it looks like it does.

So what is xstacy using to make it work? V6 exploder computers?

would the v6 exploder computer plug in and use all the same wires (or be easily reconfigured) to run the 4.9?

garyt120r
Registered User
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 6:48 am

Re: Some stupid questions about modifying EEC-4

Post #4 by garyt120r » Fri Oct 31, 2014 2:16 pm

With a Tweecer you can properly change the firing order and pretty much any programmable part of the EEC-IV. You could use a SEFI 3.8L EEC and make it work on a 300 no problem. But for what you'll pay for that, it's much easier to pick up an AEM off Ebay. Easier to tune and a great system with many options. Especially if you go forced induction someday.

motzingg
Registered User
Posts: 815
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:16 am

Re: Some stupid questions about modifying EEC-4

Post #5 by motzingg » Fri Oct 31, 2014 5:29 pm

yeah it sounds like it wouldn't be ideal for either of us.

my coworker has a '91 HO 5.0 mustang with EEC4 MAF... pretty much the single most catered-to setup out there, but its probably not worth it for me to devote much/any time to figuring out how to tune EEC4, as megasquirt is going to be much cheaper and easier to work with in the long run and i'm already pretty well versed in that.

User avatar
xctasy
VIP Member
Posts: 6585
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 10:40 am
Location: PO Box 7072 Dunedin 9011,South Island, NEW ZEALAND
Contact:

Re: Some stupid questions about modifying EEC-4

Post #6 by xctasy » Tue Jan 13, 2015 8:10 pm

I have some really good tech guys who have helped me out, one particular guy who has a background in PLC systems, and does 5.0 Ford engines...a lot of them. He's not a six cylinder guy, but he's not a crap talker, and everything I've asked he's helped me.

I like the non ODBii Aussie systems, but I like the 205 hp Explorer/Ranger/Mustang Colgne V6 EECV with OBDII very much more. Any reprogram is an 800 dollar mapping excercise, and you then have to pay for the upgrade and do something technically illegal in America, and that is manage the non critical body and emissions gear routine checks. My Kiwi aquantance just puts the extra sensors in a box, and leves them static, or does low line contitioning to them to avoid a CEL trigger.

For my less than ideal non OBDII ones:

The EECIV batch code must be a mapped one, and it reverts back to that if it has an enlivened J3 port for semi real time data logging. So if you start with a A9L, it will revert to the saved a9l tables, which is useless if you are modifying an I6.


The XR6 EECIV from 1992 to 1998 was mapped on some batch codes, and its a safe platform for a US 250 or 300. A few of them are mapped by TI Performance in Australia. They then upgrade from the standard 216 to 235 hp packages they came with, and there is a dual path intake runner system if your keen. But they are easily locked out, just like Samrt Lock and all the other mod cosn Ford added. Like EDIS. So you have a choice of inluding or exluding quite a lot.

The 1998-2002 EECV XR6 engines are mapped in some box codes, and these are non OBDII, so you can do a lot with them. They have EDIS, dual path intake igntion timing ramps, or even VVT if you are keen.

The Mustang/Explorer/Ranger SOHC 4.0 is fully OBDII, so the self diagnostics need to be given sensors with good rational data input, or it will trigger a CEL. Some are mapped and can be reflashed, but they are OBDII.


So its more expensive, but each maintants the factor six cylinder base mapping, with the ability to real time data manage, and upgrade. Base maps are all pretty good for Ford 250 or 300's, although the pulse width tables need modification for cam and stroke ratio techncially. In parctice, you can easily design the cam to suit the base program.

For me, I'm sorting out the earlier MCU EECII style systems used in the 1980 to 1995 5.8 trucks, they are a very smart system that avoids all the EECIV and V protocols. It allows in some cases some basic TPS, ISC control of carb systems using Fuel Control Valves, Duraspark II, or III or TFI. So air fuel ratios can be watched dogged to normal closed and open loop systems. I am indebted to the late Ak Miller for his Impco work with FoMoCo for calibrating the fuel control valves and using the open and closed loop on proane small sixes. Those techniques should allow me to produce an US 1983 emssions compliant Triple Carb Ford 3.3, 4.1 and 4.9 using the stock carbs, and the years of inservice data from the YFA and 1949/6145/6149/6153 equiped feedback 1-bbl carb engines.


That's my focus, not EFI any longer.

I like US EECIV CFI and Fords Aussie CFI 6cylinder systems too, but its all dead end technogy unless you can recalibrate it to suit a normaL, worked I6.


As a mssion statement, its Breathing Exhasut Induction Gearing Heads and Timing for me

The Fox Propane cars were specialty items mostly, I just copied everything from the Impco manual and Jay Storers Ak Miller inspired Propane Performance book..

See http://www.ahrf.com/legends/ak-miller/

In my opinion, Aks true secret was being a dirt under the nails technician who could swing working with engineers, (even the dumber ones from Ford...he used to be Ford Engineer appolo-gists when on retainer to Ford from the Total Performance Area till the early 80's SVO era, and an engineer mocker when he had to sort out the details. He's and Enguneeer he'd say in mock Danish. The stories about him fill the internet, and large chunks of the Earths Hot Rod So-Cal history books are made up from this mans expliots.

He said this (with emphasis mine, I hope its right)

"When you start out with nothing
And you come up with something
That's a little bit better....
Carburation
Or a little better system of camshaft or whatever...
in fuel engineering, lotta things good here with an automobile
And I saw all that and thought
"G_d, a guy can have, you know,....amplify
one area here, and he's got a lifetime running"
-Not that your gonna have Hot Rodding for a life...
but when you think of something like that
You don't think about how long its gonna last
Cause you know damn good and well
ITS NEAT!!!!!!"


and watch his video as a ripe old 80 year old.

and listen to this voice tape, from Tales Form the Track with Tom Madigan

about how some thought Ak was nuts and a crazy sob....

http://talesfromthetrack.com/audio/ak-miller

I was profoundly influenced by this great man.


EFI isn't where its at for me, I've got smaller, not bigger fish to fry, although you all know I love EFI and all the work you guys do here.


Keep it up! You've got expert Mega Squirt guys here, use the MS systems if you have a direct line to help form them. The Ford system needs these kinds of smarts.


Oh yeah. Its the simple things that kill the full transfer of cutting edge EECIV and V stuff, it needs the work of techncians to get the best of it. Not so with limited carb systems. I've dealt with this stuff for the last 15 years, and inductance and proper fault analysis by trained experts. If you want to see what its like with Ford US's smartest EFI engineers and the best Cosworth has to offer, watch this mid 80's F1 video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LkxGx5WJzA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RCdRKkt4ds

EECIV EFI engineers Jim Coates and Bob Stelmezzak and Michael Kranefuss, this ones for you!


I'm sure Ford and Cosworth will do it all again, this time with success!
Image
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 http://www.xecltd.info/?rd=10

dvldrmmr
Registered User
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 1:25 pm

Re: Some stupid questions about modifying EEC-4

Post #7 by dvldrmmr » Fri Jul 24, 2015 9:57 am

I'm sorting out the earlier MCU EECII style systems


Hey xctasy, I'm curious what information you've found on this. I have a 81 zephyr 2.3l with the MCU system, and a 84 f150 4.9l with EEC-IV FBC and TFI. Trying to sort out the ins and outs of these systems so I can put them back together and get them running (I removed them and went to DSII due to lack of knowledge and being young and dumb so to speak). Plenty of info on the EEC-IV EFI systems, but I cant find much of anything on these. The TFI especially has me interested due to the ability to control timing: with a little more work and insight on the EEC-IV, I think I can whip up a controller for the TFI similar to the EEC-IV, though using the EEC would probably be easier assuming I can figure out how to modify the tables and whatnot. Then there's the fact that I just love knowing how things work lol.
'84 Ford F150 4x4 - 4.9L, NP435 manual
'81 Mercury Zephyr - 2.3L, C3 auto

User avatar
xctasy
VIP Member
Posts: 6585
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 10:40 am
Location: PO Box 7072 Dunedin 9011,South Island, NEW ZEALAND
Contact:

Re: Some stupid questions about modifying EEC-4

Post #8 by xctasy » Sun Aug 16, 2015 10:51 pm

EECV is possiable with CFi 2-bbls as it is. The only issue is how to condition the fuel delievery to suit the application. Breaking into non V8 EECV box codes means you have to see TI industries in Australia, and attempt to use the Maotes J3 jumper to tune off the base tables. Or just go MSII.


I don't have the parts, but an Indirect Port injection system via six injectors in 3 CFI units on a log head controlled by the Aussie EEC5 would be my pick. It would look cool.

We did look at it at Ford Six back in 2003 ish.. Back then, CFI was hated, and everyone with a six is kindof in awe of V8's, so we tried using the early TriPower ideas.

Six in lines aren't too good to package, and like the Autolite 2-bbl carbs, the CFI's need a lot of bits cut down and lopped off to fit.


Image
Image

The best way to run triple CFI SBF V8 is as a port EFI system with indirect port injection, and cut the FPR and dash ports off, and then run it with external FRP with MSII. The cost is the thing...its the tri power intake and the not legal for road use status that might 'wreck the dream'...MegaSquirt makes it easy, and the Bosch injectors can be swapped for low imp versions with reduced lbs per hour easy as pie.


When Jon Enyeart at Pony Carburetors was alive, they'd just cut down a set of Pony Carbs , 289 Cali 1967's, Autolite anular discharge 2100 2-bbls or some old Holley 2300 2-bbls on a Blue Thunder Repro tri power...


On my FAZER engines, I use the stock log head, and drill it for six injectors, and then feed it with another four holes inaddition to the single 1.75" hole. Then run six tubing headers to one F150 47 mm 2-bbl 4.9 EFI unit.


When I and others on another forum looked at CFi conversions to the "foreign in line sixes" ( 2-bbl Australian 1972-1975 M code 170 Bhp 2V 250 and Argentinas 1968-1996 108hp ME188 and 164 hp SP 221) in 2001- 2005, we did a full study of CFi operation.

One of the pictures on another forum I extensivley searched during 2014 is actually ex Ford Six Peformance discussion item, showing CFI on a 108 hp 3.1 liter 'Argie' in line six intake manifold.

Image

From Old 08-08-2011, 10:55 AM Re: Roller cam and distributor gear ??, all ford techno board
PSIG. Example of CFI installed onto a Ford I6 performance application. The CFI on the right is mounted sideways compared to the manifold on the left, an is a standard 302 unit with 'choke', dashpot, and blue-top 500cc injectors:


Aussie Falcon M code 170 Bhp gross High Performance 250 2V versus Argentina 108 hp SAE net Max Eccno 188 cubic inch with US 2 BBL CFi

The only reliable info I could find back then was the 1988 Impco Techical Service Bulletens, which covered everything. They were the only ones who could legally fiddle with the stock computer and control systems.

The whole swag of so called 2-bbl engines was designed from the early years to be upward compatible with the the CFI, as Ford wasn't sure if the VV 2700 or 7200 was gonna be continued. Ford was experiementing with throttle body suppliers for factory CFI's from the 4-bbl Conelec Shelby's 1968 Califonia Special Green Meenie...

The Ford info we have now have wasn't out there on the net ten or even five years ago, and there specfically wasn't enough info on how to retrack the often out of range idle on any 1980 to 1987 two point Central Fuel Injection. Nine times out of ten, it was the timing chain or MAP sensor, but we din't have the shoe in to the Ford MotorCompany TSB's.

That is because there were about 15 odd different types of non functional CEL 2-bbl CFI'S over those seven years.

Approx five versions of the 80, 81, 82, 83 and 84 small CFi EECIII 5.0
six versions of the small CFi EECIV CA 82, 83 and all 84-87 3.8's,
the two versions of the 84-85 EECIV large 5.0 CFi,
the two versions 84-85 EECIV small 5.0 CFi.

This was not including some totally wild passenger and truck MCU or EECIII Duraspark III engines with odd ball carbs that no one could tell if they were CFI, 2700 VV, 7200VV, or 2150 Motorcraft 2-BBL 255, 302's, 351W or 351m's or 400's.




Impco's Technical Service bulletins from the late 80's cover the best info on the control systems of pre OBDII Ford systems. I was fortunate to read them back in 1990 when I got Jay Strorers LPG Performance book. Ak Miller was the guy who had to figure out how to hook up LPG systems to those 1979-1985 EEC and MCU "knight mares".


The issue back then was you have to prove you weren't invalidating the original gasoline Federal Ford EO durability and certification protocols to gain a CARB sticker for alternative fuel. Understanding what was there first was then required. To this day, the best diagnostic test technicians are those that have to use Propane Gas systems with stock gasoline engines, and not trigger a fault code. The early systems had either no check light, or it was hooked up to the oil pressure sensor. Good on ya Ford, you had a better idea :idea: :thumbup:

What is hard is that the CFI also was EECIV or EECIII, and some of the sub systems were different. The generic info was right on,

http://www.tomco-inc.com/Tech_Tips/ttt3.pdf

but there were some parts which were discontinued on the 1984-1985 High Out put versions that were still there on the California Pnather and Fox CFI's in 1984. Then the different CFi 3.8's confused people, so did the HSC's, which weren't remotely similar due to the injector differences.

The old EECIII, EECIV and MCUs that didn't have check lights, or MIL's that weren't connected to the ECU are very easy to alter, and use some Pulse Width Modulation techniques with any of the Fuel valve equiped old Carter YFA 1-BBL's or the four types of Bosch conventional injector 2-bbl Motorcraft CFI will help you. The Nissan/Chrysler style injector on the Ford 1-bbl TBi HSC 2300 was a different kettle of fish, but it was duplicated in Australia using the VG30E Pathefinder 2-bbl V6 throttle body, so the systems were constantly evolving, still with EECIV code right till 1991.

The wring and coding though is old, and you can't easily break into them using the stdnard Ford code data. Its also easy to destroy them if you misswire them.


MCU and Duraspark III systems are the smartest systesm, they have crank positions sensors, and you can do some very tricky stuff without anyone even knowing. IIRC, Truck, Van and Police Windsor 351 are around, 2150 2-bbl, 4180 4-bbl and 7200 2-bbl V V Fords up to 1995 with the old Brown Box Duraspark III are around, I think.


Megasquirt and Audrino allow you to assume control over some systems, and make your own 'under the radar' feedback systems.

I personally like the basic core sparking system of the CFi EECIII from mid 78 to 84. It reused the Duraspark III operation system, which allowed the stock Duraspark II to be rewired to run through the Crank Position sensor like a Sequential Port injected car. Based on the old, original wire code, Ford gurus just did five things.

1.Rewired the orange wire to come from the the EEC-III (instead of the stator in the distributor to the module).

2.The purple wire was deleted on the Duraspark III, but on Duraspark II it goes from the module to the stator.

3.The black wire goes to ground on both Duraspark II and III, but on III it doesn't ground at the distributor.

4.In addition, the neg coil wire doesnt go to the EEC-III, it goes right from the coil to the Duraspark III module, and the tachometer (if equipped).

5.The Duraspark III distibutor is subtly and visually different to the V8 Duraspark II. Inside, there is no stator controll, nor vacuum and centrifugal advances. That messes people up, the EEC III module normally has a Brown subsidary box which does all the spark mapping. The Duraspark III module can be in a number of places, and the MCU like EEC III in a number of places too. Like under the passenger seat in bigger Foxes.

Other than these, it's wired exactly like a DS-II system. The CP sensor (which looks like a VRS sensor is found on other non CFI cars like some 351M's and 400's right into the 83 model year, as well as the 351W's) then allows the strange Duraspark III unit and its associated Brown Duraspark III module to fire the wires. This bad boy has confused so many people when the EEC III module gets ditched and CFI has been replaced with a nice big 4-bbl, how the thing can work fine, and then stand you up when the test conditions triggers a failure code.

The EEC-III or CP sensor can cause a no spark condition and is very simular to the DS-II's stator in the distributor going out and it ran the Duraspark III like a TFI igntion module, although it wasn't optically sesnor driven. The durability faults of the non Ford Duraspark exist....if that unit fails, if the coil has a cool pass for ohms, but a warm or hot testing failure, if the under rotor magnetic pick up coil fails, the system will not work.
Image
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 http://www.xecltd.info/?rd=10

User avatar
xctasy
VIP Member
Posts: 6585
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 10:40 am
Location: PO Box 7072 Dunedin 9011,South Island, NEW ZEALAND
Contact:

Re: Some stupid questions about modifying EEC-4

Post #9 by xctasy » Sun Aug 30, 2015 1:12 am

The key thing is that old stuff, especially if its the fully fuel managed EECIV, will have old contacts, old wires, old junctions, old capacitors. MCU is different, but still similar.

If Fords 2-bbl CFi, Old regulators, old type injectors.

The upside is
it has about 12 fault cods,
no OBDII engine light but a MIL light,
and you can scan it.

And how it responds to cam, exhaust, injector sizes, choke and ISC controller operation. And what are most likely the worlds best engineers to control and calibrate the system. Lots not forget, the USA's laiz a faire mix of private and corporate discussions, contractors, sub contractors and suppliers always work in the best interests of the bill payer.

Lastly, and this applies to some versions of the carb fed MCU, there is an aspect of

fuel control table Pulse Width Modulation,
Keep Alive Memory (KAM) and
block learning Adaptive Control stratergy (blACs).

Each is limited, but it has one.


Fords EECIV era stuff checks all the inputs from the sensors and sets the outputs based on all the parameters that include, adaptive strategy learned, actual sensors readings. It won't fix things untill warmed up, but Ford in the early EECIV era stuff on carb era engines had subsystems controlled , variously, base idle, progression, wide open throttle and did this with YFA, Variable Venturi and CFi versions with some really smart blended controll systems.

The Fox 2.3 liters and 83 to '86 F-150, they went to 1bbl carb, and that blends all the problems of YFA Carter tuning with the problems with TFi, EECIV and chocke and ISC and throttle valve kickdowns... in terms of level of complication, its shear rocket science. 1-bbl carb tuning is the most difficult art form there is, EGR, AIR, ignition, air, fuel, ball check or jet leak, then the ECU tries to bring it back into range. The low pressure fuel pump based 1-bbl set up uses a very smart basic PWM fuel control module, it just doesn't like the leaky intake bolt and the accelerator and kickdown/TV and emissions stuff pulling the base calibration WAY out of wack.

If the 342155 posts and 41323 total topics from the more than 10000 members we've had on Ford six since 2001 haven't covered more than 30% of the post on the how do I tune my 1-bbl topic, I'd be very suprised....

Regards KAM and block learning Adaptive C]ontrol stratergy. It relearns over a period. Its typical of Nissan, early CalPacs and EECIV's. A five liter Fcode 140, or M code 165, or 180 hp AC system may be limited and 'brain dead' as far as the EECIV system is concerned (its algorithims were actually updated from the EECIII based system according to the guy I discussed this with). Its functionality is limited because Air pump and EGR opperation impinges on the storage process but according to ColdwaterHotrod on teamshelby.com, it works like this:-

It uses the last operative value it stored while in Closed Loop. Since the KAM has power to it even when the ignition key is turned off, the blACs table retains it's information. The only way to clear the blACs table is by battery disconnection. Do that and you're back to working with a clean slate and the whole process starts over again. There are limits to how much the blACs can change the calibrations. The blACs table has a range of roughly 25%. CFi isn't as smart as the later EECIV systems, your CFi was the first EECIV before Port EFI, so Ford were still rapidly learning.

Best thing is with the right attention to throttle body type, EECIII or EECIV catch/batch or Box codes, it will run anything from 225 hp cammed 5.0 engine, or a 120 hp 3.8 to 5.0 2-bbl engine.

Right off the bat.

Here's an 84 Fox LX 5.0 liter CFi 165 hp computer

Image



.....running a way more than just cammed up with aftermarket cam 225 hp plus 89 roller engine.

Look at this vid

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tu_dB1Q7Og


Image

And another with a big a$$ dual exhaust on a 3.55:1 geared 165 hp 84 Mustang

https://youtu.be/JtAG3JkI-lY

For 85, some of the Fox CFi's went to 180 hp on some cars. So the Ford junk bits you find are actually able to interface with Duraspark II, III, TFi and 2-bbl direct mount in line sixes. Actually, the igntion part is the key area where a practically fuel only EECIV system can open the door to making a Duraspark II behave like a Duraspark III or an EDIS-6.


Its the open sharing discussions that make it work.
Image
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 http://www.xecltd.info/?rd=10

User avatar
xctasy
VIP Member
Posts: 6585
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 10:40 am
Location: PO Box 7072 Dunedin 9011,South Island, NEW ZEALAND
Contact:

Re: Some stupid questions about modifying EEC-4

Post #10 by xctasy » Sun Aug 30, 2015 3:45 am

EECIV was the birth of true inovation for Ford. EECI, II,III were very special initial leaps, becasue in one swoop, Ford decided to avoid ever building its own carbs again, and the VV2700 and 7200 were it. Holley, Weber and Carter were then the outsourced suppliers.

On Ford Six, we've looked at the voltage change injectors like the TBi Ford 2.3 ohv HSC ran (also the 3.2 and 3.9 CFi Falcon 135 and 161 hp engines from 1988-1991 and 3 liter 145 hp Nissan Pathefinder VQ30E throttl body EFI in 2-bbl form). They are the Chrysler/Geo/GM Throttle Body type, not captured Bosch as the 1982-1987 CFi 3.8 Essex 90, and 1979-1985 Windsor 5.0 were. Both have parts supply, and Ford have EECIV systesm with catch codes for each, in 1 and 2-bbl systems.


See viewtopic.php?f=1&t=72858

PWM based systems allow control of the secondary outer CFi's on a triple CFi or the fuel controll valves on a triple YFA Carter operate to calibrate fuel trim.

Josh picked up on the Control Systems approach. Using electric motors doesn't allow over run if they fail, but Pulse Width Modulation of solenoids or control valves eliminates some of the traditional SAE type control system worries all good engineers consider. Fords work on onboard control covered traditonal risk managament, so using an existing 2-bbl throttle body or YFA with PWM allows you to make up to the 350 hp mark with relative ease.


Something like Megasquirt is able to treat a set of three carbs like a batch fire injection system. Modern systems can fit in the space of a standard Ford ECU, and you can basically do anything with the old Ford 80's Carb/CFi/TBi parts.
Image
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 http://www.xecltd.info/?rd=10

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests