> Having a set of idle injectors in the manifold for economy, high volume
> injectors in the throttle bodies for maximum power and writing a program that
> enables engine function for both MAF and TPS isn't beyond me, I just have
> better things to do with my life.
IR EFI is no more difficult than throttle body injection or mass air SEFI
or any of the other approaches. You don't have to make it complicated but
the flexibility is there. Alpha-N is the simplest EFI approach and can be
used successfully on IR. Some of the ECU's even have a simulation program
built in. You enter your engine parameters and the program calculates a
basic fuel map for you.
> My statement stands about the IR EFI systems, don't expect them to be plug
> and play.
I say pretty much the same thing about carbs.
> If you have to have one, stay with the PPC.
If you think the PPC system is plug-and-play, think again.
Dan Jones
Thanks Dan. To sum it up I guess you can get the mechanical hilborns to work, just not real well. Like you would constantly have trouble starting the car and have to change plugs once a week and like that. I think I will stick with the stock holley carb for now. But maybe someday if I decide to make a full race Pantera.
I have no argument with anyones IR EFI system. That's mostly I suppose because I haven't done one yet.
I can state that as for me I wouldn't consider buying anyones system unless I can see the installation and tuning instructions first.
Perhaps there is no problem with them at all and it is the infinate tunabilaty that makes the tuning go on for infinity?
I didn't suggest to go with PPC's system because it is plug and play. I seriously doubt any of them are.
At least with a Weber 48IDA system one purchases the hardware and the tune from the builder. The tuning choices are not endless.
I would expect at least an IR EFI setup would come with substancial tech support.
I can state that as for me I wouldn't consider buying anyones system unless I can see the installation and tuning instructions first.
Perhaps there is no problem with them at all and it is the infinate tunabilaty that makes the tuning go on for infinity?
I didn't suggest to go with PPC's system because it is plug and play. I seriously doubt any of them are.
At least with a Weber 48IDA system one purchases the hardware and the tune from the builder. The tuning choices are not endless.
I would expect at least an IR EFI setup would come with substancial tech support.
Some of you guys seem to be trying to avoid the computer controlled FI. Is it because you are afraid it is too complicated? I realize that a lap top is a must but I must say that tuning one is not hard. In fact I think you will find it educational. I would not try to convince some one who really does not want to do it but it is not that hard.
One of the great advantages to computer controlled EFI is it can do so many things. For instance, it cuts fuel in deceleration to keep the engine from chugging in a slow down. You can change at how long it waits before it drops the fuel, what rpm it picks it back up. You have control. You can change what rpm the engine runs when cold, changes in fuel for warm up, changes in timing, changes in acceleration parameters, and on, and on, and on. Does this seem complicated? Not really. The manuals that come with most of these explain what the software does and how it handles each think fairly well. If you pick a base engine to start from you don't have to set all of this but if you find the engine a little rich in acceleration, pull out the laptop and change the number a bit. It really is a lot simpler then pulling a carb and changing the accelerator pump, drilling bleeds, feeds, emulsions, putting it back together and seeing where you are.
With a narrow band closed loop system, cruise and medium throttle will be controlled at 14.7. You pick a point where if you go beyond it goes to open loop. You generally don't want to make full throttle runs at 14.7 and most systems are set up to go open loop for heavy throttle usage so you can make it richer.
With a wide band loop you can control the mixture you want to run at any point. If you want to cruise down the highway at 15.5:1 just set it. If you want it to drop to 12.7 as soon as you get in the throttle, it's there!
I know some of you may be a little gun shy of the computer but the computer allows you to change the EXACT parameter you seek to change...and that is so cool!
My only problem is I had to order a new laptop battery. Otherwise I am going to need a long extension chord for the drive!
Gary
One of the great advantages to computer controlled EFI is it can do so many things. For instance, it cuts fuel in deceleration to keep the engine from chugging in a slow down. You can change at how long it waits before it drops the fuel, what rpm it picks it back up. You have control. You can change what rpm the engine runs when cold, changes in fuel for warm up, changes in timing, changes in acceleration parameters, and on, and on, and on. Does this seem complicated? Not really. The manuals that come with most of these explain what the software does and how it handles each think fairly well. If you pick a base engine to start from you don't have to set all of this but if you find the engine a little rich in acceleration, pull out the laptop and change the number a bit. It really is a lot simpler then pulling a carb and changing the accelerator pump, drilling bleeds, feeds, emulsions, putting it back together and seeing where you are.
With a narrow band closed loop system, cruise and medium throttle will be controlled at 14.7. You pick a point where if you go beyond it goes to open loop. You generally don't want to make full throttle runs at 14.7 and most systems are set up to go open loop for heavy throttle usage so you can make it richer.
With a wide band loop you can control the mixture you want to run at any point. If you want to cruise down the highway at 15.5:1 just set it. If you want it to drop to 12.7 as soon as you get in the throttle, it's there!
I know some of you may be a little gun shy of the computer but the computer allows you to change the EXACT parameter you seek to change...and that is so cool!
My only problem is I had to order a new laptop battery. Otherwise I am going to need a long extension chord for the drive!
Gary
In cars like a Mustang, carbureted cars produce in the range of 100hp more then EFI. twEECer included.
How long did it take to tune the system? 15 minutes, 15 days, 15 years? What...you mean it still isn't done?
Laptops are fun in cars. In fact I like to thow them out the car window, usually...but not always at speed. They break up better that way.
With the Webers, I just throw the fouled plugs at the Inglese Inductions poster on the wall.
How long did it take to tune the system? 15 minutes, 15 days, 15 years? What...you mean it still isn't done?
Laptops are fun in cars. In fact I like to thow them out the car window, usually...but not always at speed. They break up better that way.
With the Webers, I just throw the fouled plugs at the Inglese Inductions poster on the wall.
I tuned for about 30 min and got it pretty drivable. I can turn the key and it starts with no interventiona nd runs pretty good. I expect it will take me about an hour to get most things where I want it but I want to get the lap top battery first. Most of it can be done before I ever drive it. The final tuning will be done while driving. But the nice thing is once set, it's set. If you have a fat spot or a flat spot that's bugging you, you just pull out the laptop and change it.
And no I don't buy the 100hp difference.
Gary
And no I don't buy the 100hp difference.
Gary
> In cars like a Mustang, carbureted cars produce in the range of 100hp more
> then EFI. twEECer included.
That's simply not true. My buddy Marc runs the fastest hydraulic roller
cammed 5.0L-based Mustang in the country. It's fuel injected and last year
it made right at 550 HP at the rear wheels on the dynojet. Doesn't take
long at all to get it in tune with the wide band 02. I spent more time
doing this weekend tuning a 428CJ with carb in a Cobra replica. The wide
band 02 makes it so easy to tune it feels like cheating but it still took
4 hours to get it ready for the dyno.
In cases where a carb can pick up 100 HP in a Mustang, the guy did not have
the EFI system spec'd out properly. You have to run the proper manifold
runner length for the RPM range you're try to tune to and make sure the rest
of the bits can support the fuel and air flow.
Dan Jones
> then EFI. twEECer included.
That's simply not true. My buddy Marc runs the fastest hydraulic roller
cammed 5.0L-based Mustang in the country. It's fuel injected and last year
it made right at 550 HP at the rear wheels on the dynojet. Doesn't take
long at all to get it in tune with the wide band 02. I spent more time
doing this weekend tuning a 428CJ with carb in a Cobra replica. The wide
band 02 makes it so easy to tune it feels like cheating but it still took
4 hours to get it ready for the dyno.
In cases where a carb can pick up 100 HP in a Mustang, the guy did not have
the EFI system spec'd out properly. You have to run the proper manifold
runner length for the RPM range you're try to tune to and make sure the rest
of the bits can support the fuel and air flow.
Dan Jones
Now wait a minute here. Where is the O2 sensor on a Pantera??? Where does theknock sensor plug in. I can't remember where the crankposition sensor is either. It IS a little more complicated and yeah there are more components to break or go bad. No I will gladly conceed the point that it would run tons better with EFI. But mechanical FI does sound simpler to me. Set theidle at 2000 rpm. The throtle becomes an on/off switch pretty much. Runs terrible, hardly ever starts, but once you get it rolling, runs like a striped ass ape. So as long as you don't use it for daily driving, good old mechanical fuelie is tuff to beat.
Looks like we have the beings on another grudge match race huh?
I want to add my voice to those who like fuel injection.
There are 3 types right? Speed Density, Alpha-N and Mass Air Flow. (I'm ignoring mechanical FI)
One of the last hot rod projects I was involved in, quite some time ago now, was the retro-fit of a Ford EEC-IV fuel injection system into a classic Mustang. This was before kits to do so were readily available, I helped the owner "roll his own" using many parts salvaged form the used auto parts emporium (wrecking yard). The system was literally plug and play. We installed the parts, engineered the wiring, installed & hooked up sensors, turned the key and the car immediately started and ran like a car with fuel injection, where as the last time the car had ran, it ran like a car with a carburetor. What a difference! This experience made me a believer.
The Alpha-N boxes and Speed Density boxes that were sold with many aftermarket fuel injection systems in earler times I believe were poorly engineered, too primitive, or possibly they just didn't consider who the end user was, what ever the case, many people purchased them and could never get them tuned properly so they gave up and went away with a bad attitude regarding fuel injection. I believe the latest generation of boxes on the market are much better in that respect. I have seen in ad copy from each manufacturer where great attempts have been made to make their systems more "plug and play", i.e. more user friendly for the less than technically astute end users.
If you want easy to install fuel injection my recommendation is a Mass Air Flow system using Ford EEC-IV or EEC-V electronics. Of course, those folks wanting the independent runner look, must resort to Alpha-N or Speed Density controls.
Whether we are talking carburetors or fuel injection, many people including myself have found aftermarket independent runner systems to be "fussy". However, I have worked on & been around motorcycles for over 4 decades that almost always use independent runner intakes, whether they have 1, 2, 3 or 4 cylinders, and they have ALWAYS run perfectly BITCHEN from idle to very high red lines. In all weather, all year 'round, and over a wide range of altitudes, they start & pull with out a hitch throughout their power bands. So indepenent runner systems can work, IF they are engineered properly.
And they certainly look bitchen!
your friend on the DTBB
There are 3 types right? Speed Density, Alpha-N and Mass Air Flow. (I'm ignoring mechanical FI)
One of the last hot rod projects I was involved in, quite some time ago now, was the retro-fit of a Ford EEC-IV fuel injection system into a classic Mustang. This was before kits to do so were readily available, I helped the owner "roll his own" using many parts salvaged form the used auto parts emporium (wrecking yard). The system was literally plug and play. We installed the parts, engineered the wiring, installed & hooked up sensors, turned the key and the car immediately started and ran like a car with fuel injection, where as the last time the car had ran, it ran like a car with a carburetor. What a difference! This experience made me a believer.
The Alpha-N boxes and Speed Density boxes that were sold with many aftermarket fuel injection systems in earler times I believe were poorly engineered, too primitive, or possibly they just didn't consider who the end user was, what ever the case, many people purchased them and could never get them tuned properly so they gave up and went away with a bad attitude regarding fuel injection. I believe the latest generation of boxes on the market are much better in that respect. I have seen in ad copy from each manufacturer where great attempts have been made to make their systems more "plug and play", i.e. more user friendly for the less than technically astute end users.
If you want easy to install fuel injection my recommendation is a Mass Air Flow system using Ford EEC-IV or EEC-V electronics. Of course, those folks wanting the independent runner look, must resort to Alpha-N or Speed Density controls.
Whether we are talking carburetors or fuel injection, many people including myself have found aftermarket independent runner systems to be "fussy". However, I have worked on & been around motorcycles for over 4 decades that almost always use independent runner intakes, whether they have 1, 2, 3 or 4 cylinders, and they have ALWAYS run perfectly BITCHEN from idle to very high red lines. In all weather, all year 'round, and over a wide range of altitudes, they start & pull with out a hitch throughout their power bands. So indepenent runner systems can work, IF they are engineered properly.
And they certainly look bitchen!
your friend on the DTBB
quote:Originally posted by george pence:
The Alpha-N boxes and Speed Density boxes that were sold with many aftermarket fuel injection systems in earler times I believe were poorly engineered, too primitive, or possibly they just didn't consider who the end user was, what ever the case, many people purchased them and could never get them tuned properly so they gave up and went away with a bad attitude regarding fuel injection. I believe the latest generation of boxes on the market are much better in that respect. I have seen in ad copy from each manufacturer where great attempts have been made to make their systems more "plug and play", i.e. more user friendly for the less than technically astute end users.
DTBB
Depending on the software many if not most can switch between Speed Density and Alpha-N and can even run different modes at different throttle or other sensor positions.
quote:(I'm ignoring mechanical FI)
I noticed that.
George, I don't think that it is necessarily the look that is the main factor to pick an IR system.
I think that is the abilaty to tune each cylinder as indepently as necessary for maximum performance.
Weber carbs theoretically can be tuned to each runner. Mine are not.
It is the promiss of computerized IR EFI to be able to do this.
The Ford system works well for replacing a single Holley 4v. It has a common plenum. That is what it was designed for.
How much more complex is a v8 with an IR setup? Isn't it something like 8 to the power of 8?
Add to that a system with no oxygen sensor and a mathamatical compromise between TPS and MAF.
A compromise that most likely will have to vary according to things like air temp, humidity, altitude, engine load and fuel quality, for each cylinder.
I think that although there is a basic script available to fall back upon, the variables for a car that is expected to be comfortably street driven and perform like an Indy car are too great.
To say it is going to be "tempermental" may be an understatement, which is all that I was ever trying to say to begin with.
Webers certainly are tempermental. I do not deny that.
I didn't intend to get into a technical discussion with people who obviously have vested interest in the marketing of these systems.
Not to doubt anyone or be argumentative, but I presume that those of you speak from practice and not theory and have used all of the formentioned systems?
As I said, I don't have the time and interest anymore (I'm really getting old and cranky) to do the testing and development. When it's plug and play, call me.
I think that is the abilaty to tune each cylinder as indepently as necessary for maximum performance.
Weber carbs theoretically can be tuned to each runner. Mine are not.
It is the promiss of computerized IR EFI to be able to do this.
The Ford system works well for replacing a single Holley 4v. It has a common plenum. That is what it was designed for.
How much more complex is a v8 with an IR setup? Isn't it something like 8 to the power of 8?
Add to that a system with no oxygen sensor and a mathamatical compromise between TPS and MAF.
A compromise that most likely will have to vary according to things like air temp, humidity, altitude, engine load and fuel quality, for each cylinder.
I think that although there is a basic script available to fall back upon, the variables for a car that is expected to be comfortably street driven and perform like an Indy car are too great.
To say it is going to be "tempermental" may be an understatement, which is all that I was ever trying to say to begin with.
Webers certainly are tempermental. I do not deny that.
I didn't intend to get into a technical discussion with people who obviously have vested interest in the marketing of these systems.
Not to doubt anyone or be argumentative, but I presume that those of you speak from practice and not theory and have used all of the formentioned systems?
As I said, I don't have the time and interest anymore (I'm really getting old and cranky) to do the testing and development. When it's plug and play, call me.
> I think that is the abilaty to tune each cylinder as indepently as necessary
> for maximum performance.
That's not why I'm going with IR EFI. I'm doing it to tame a big cam in
a 90 degree V8. Since the runners are isolated from each other, reversion
from adjacent cylinders does not foul the intake stroke, allowing a longer
cam duration with a streetable idle and better low-to-mid range performance.
Kirby Schraeder runs a PPC-sourced IR EFI system on his 377 cubic inch
Cleveland stroker (iron 4V heads with Weber lower and 48mm TWM throttle
bodies). He runs a fairly large overlap 288FDP Crower solid flat tappet oval
track cam on the street. Specs on his cam are 254/258 degrees at 0.050"
(288/294 degrees advertised), 0.569"/0.580" lift (0.022"/0.024" clearance hot)
with 105 lobe centers. That's a lot of overlap for a street car. According
to Kirby, with a 700DP Holley on a Ford aluminum dual plane intake manifold,
it had a wild idle and wouldn't start pulling well until 3000 RPM (Crower
rates the cam range as 3500 to 7000 RPM). When he installed the independent
runner EFI, the first thing he said was "Where'd my idle go?". He noted it
now pulls 5th gear from 1500 RPM. Kirby also noted it's tough staying off
the 7200 RPM rev-limiter in lower gears.
Independent runner also allows tuning of the inlet tract length generally not
possibly with single 4 barrel plenum type intakes. For my stroker engine, I
needed relatively short runners. Longer runners increased low and mid-range
torque but that came with a big loss of HP in higher RPM ranges.
> How much more complex is a v8 with an IR setup? Isn't it something like 8
> to the power of 8?
No. It's not that much more complex. In fact, Ford used their EEC-IV
speed density computer on their IR EFI F1 Cosworth V8's.
> Add to that a system with no oxygen sensor and a mathamatical compromise
> between TPS and MAF.
What system are you talking about that doesn't use an O2 sensor?
> I didn't intend to get into a technical discussion with people who obviously
> have vested interest in the marketing of these systems.
Who here has a vested interested in the marketing of these systems?
> Not to doubt anyone or be argumentative, but I presume that those of you speak
> from practice and not theory and have used all of the formentioned systems?
Speed density and mass air EEC-IV experience yes. This will be my first
IR EFI system but a couple of my friends run them and love them.
Dan Jones
> for maximum performance.
That's not why I'm going with IR EFI. I'm doing it to tame a big cam in
a 90 degree V8. Since the runners are isolated from each other, reversion
from adjacent cylinders does not foul the intake stroke, allowing a longer
cam duration with a streetable idle and better low-to-mid range performance.
Kirby Schraeder runs a PPC-sourced IR EFI system on his 377 cubic inch
Cleveland stroker (iron 4V heads with Weber lower and 48mm TWM throttle
bodies). He runs a fairly large overlap 288FDP Crower solid flat tappet oval
track cam on the street. Specs on his cam are 254/258 degrees at 0.050"
(288/294 degrees advertised), 0.569"/0.580" lift (0.022"/0.024" clearance hot)
with 105 lobe centers. That's a lot of overlap for a street car. According
to Kirby, with a 700DP Holley on a Ford aluminum dual plane intake manifold,
it had a wild idle and wouldn't start pulling well until 3000 RPM (Crower
rates the cam range as 3500 to 7000 RPM). When he installed the independent
runner EFI, the first thing he said was "Where'd my idle go?". He noted it
now pulls 5th gear from 1500 RPM. Kirby also noted it's tough staying off
the 7200 RPM rev-limiter in lower gears.
Independent runner also allows tuning of the inlet tract length generally not
possibly with single 4 barrel plenum type intakes. For my stroker engine, I
needed relatively short runners. Longer runners increased low and mid-range
torque but that came with a big loss of HP in higher RPM ranges.
> How much more complex is a v8 with an IR setup? Isn't it something like 8
> to the power of 8?
No. It's not that much more complex. In fact, Ford used their EEC-IV
speed density computer on their IR EFI F1 Cosworth V8's.
> Add to that a system with no oxygen sensor and a mathamatical compromise
> between TPS and MAF.
What system are you talking about that doesn't use an O2 sensor?
> I didn't intend to get into a technical discussion with people who obviously
> have vested interest in the marketing of these systems.
Who here has a vested interested in the marketing of these systems?
> Not to doubt anyone or be argumentative, but I presume that those of you speak
> from practice and not theory and have used all of the formentioned systems?
Speed density and mass air EEC-IV experience yes. This will be my first
IR EFI system but a couple of my friends run them and love them.
Dan Jones
I think I started the "no 02 Sensor" stuff when I posted this quote from Hilborn a few days ago:"Along with not needing a laptop, our ECU does not require a MAP, MAF or O2 sensor. It is commonly referred to as an "Alpha N" computer. How can it possibly work without all those sensors you ask? When tuned, the ECU uses a maximum wide open throttle setting to identify the part throttle settings using TPS, coolant temp, RPM and acceleration inputs. We may not be as exact as a laptop to tune system, but we have given access to fuel injection for those who do not want to buy a laptop and learn complicated fuel maps, spend big dollars to hire a professional tuner, or have been waiting in the wings for the technology that we currently offer."
Guys thanks to all of you for posting on this topic I am learning a lot, and really enjoying the process. Dave
Guys thanks to all of you for posting on this topic I am learning a lot, and really enjoying the process. Dave
quote:Originally posted by #5972:
I think I started the "no 02 Sensor" stuff when I posted this quote from Hilborn a few days ago:"Along with not needing a laptop, our ECU does not require a MAP, MAF or O2 sensor. It is commonly referred to as an "Alpha N" computer. How can it possibly work without all those sensors you ask? When tuned, the ECU uses a maximum wide open throttle setting to identify the part throttle settings using TPS, coolant temp, RPM and acceleration inputs. We may not be as exact as a laptop to tune system, but we have given access to fuel injection for those who do not want to buy a laptop and learn complicated fuel maps, spend big dollars to hire a professional tuner, or have been waiting in the wings for the technology that we currently offer."
Guys thanks to all of you for posting on this topic I am learning a lot, and really enjoying the process. Dave
Even a speed density does not have to relly on an O2. The O2 is only for closed loop operation. From what you have said I still don't understand where it get's it's base fuel mapping from. Is there a way you can "tweak" it? It sounds like a computer controled set up where some one else can change the parameters but you can't.
Gary
quote:It sounds like a computer controled set up where some one else can change the parameters but you can't.
Yep, sounds just like the IT department in every major company on the planet. They are so damn concerned you might do something usefull with your computer, they make it so it is so secure that the machine is virtualy worthless.
Yep give me a good old mechanical system and maybe a few vacuum tubes. I can make it work.
quote:Originally posted by Daniel_Jones:
That's not why I'm going with IR EFI. I'm doing it to tame a big cam in
a 90 degree V8. Since the runners are isolated from each other, reversion
from adjacent cylinders does not foul the intake stroke, allowing a longer
cam duration with a streetable idle and better low-to-mid range performance.
Kirby Schraeder runs a PPC-sourced IR EFI system on his 377 cubic inch
Cleveland stroker (iron 4V heads with Weber lower and 48mm TWM throttle
bodies). He runs a fairly large overlap 288FDP Crower solid flat tappet oval
track cam on the street. Specs on his cam are 254/258 degrees at 0.050"
(288/294 degrees advertised), 0.569"/0.580" lift (0.022"/0.024" clearance hot)
with 105 lobe centers. That's a lot of overlap for a street car. According
to Kirby, with a 700DP Holley on a Ford aluminum dual plane intake manifold,
it had a wild idle and wouldn't start pulling well until 3000 RPM (Crower
rates the cam range as 3500 to 7000 RPM). When he installed the independent
runner EFI, the first thing he said was "Where'd my idle go?". He noted it
now pulls 5th gear from 1500 RPM. Kirby also noted it's tough staying off
the 7200 RPM rev-limiter in lower gears.
Dan Jones
Dan, Here I have to disagree with you. In the case of Weber 48 IDA's on an IR manifold, camshaft overlap needs to be limited as much as possible.
The reversion from the valve overlap pushes the raw fuel back out of the stack.
In the INDY cars in '63 and '64 you could clearly see a fuel plum (cloud) starting at the velocity stacks and be drawn behind the car by the aerodynamics.
I have run a cam with as little as 28 degrees of overlap to reduce the reverb.
I now think that as much as 40 degrees is probably ok.
You can make argument with me that because the fuel injector is timing the fuel shot that the reversion is reduced, but it certainly isn't eliminated, not at high rpm.
If one runs a high overlap with an IR manifold at speed for any kind of distance and sooner or later it's gonna be a kaboom baby.
IR manifolds do not fix the reverberation issue. They accentuate it.
quote:Originally posted by comp2:quote:Originally posted by #5972:
I think I started the "no 02 Sensor" stuff when I posted this quote from Hilborn a few days ago:"Along with not needing a laptop, our ECU does not require a MAP, MAF or O2 sensor. It is commonly referred to as an "Alpha N" computer. How can it possibly work without all those sensors you ask? When tuned, the ECU uses a maximum wide open throttle setting to identify the part throttle settings using TPS, coolant temp, RPM and acceleration inputs. We may not be as exact as a laptop to tune system, but we have given access to fuel injection for those who do not want to buy a laptop and learn complicated fuel maps, spend big dollars to hire a professional tuner, or have been waiting in the wings for the technology that we currently offer."
Guys thanks to all of you for posting on this topic I am learning a lot, and really enjoying the process. Dave
Even a speed density does not have to relly on an O2. The O2 is only for closed loop operation. From what you have said I still don't understand where it get's it's base fuel mapping from. Is there a way you can "tweak" it? It sounds like a computer controled set up where some one else can change the parameters but you can't.
Gary
What I interpret that as saying is that they (Hilborn) have written a fuel map for you.
Since you don't have a computer, or need a computer, you don't change it, or you simply can't change it.
Get the instructions first and look under the heading of changing the fuel script or map.
Maybe they give you a chip? (Yes that was a sarcastic remark, sorry I couldn't resist)
George,
How did the performance change on the classic mustang when switching from carb to EEC-IV
Did you get smoother running, more power and better fuel economy??
Just how common is this stuff in breakers yards in the US?
How did the performance change on the classic mustang when switching from carb to EEC-IV
Did you get smoother running, more power and better fuel economy??
Just how common is this stuff in breakers yards in the US?
> Dan, Here I have to disagree with you. In the case of Weber 48 IDA's on an
> IR manifold, camshaft overlap needs to be limited as much as possible.
I was referring to IR EFI which has no such limitation. Webers and non-timed
mechanical injection have that problem because they are constant flow. But
with SEFI, the fuel is not injected on the overlap pulse. I know guys running
260 degree duration (at 0.050" lift) cams with IR EFI and they have no problems
with reversion.
> The reversion from the valve overlap pushes the raw fuel back out of the
> stack.
Not if there isn't any fuel there to begin with. It also depends upon the
length of the stack (i.e. the harmonic you choose to tune). If you pick a
stack length that tunes at the first harmonic, the effect is strong in a
narrow RPM band. Tuning to the second or third harmonic is less sensitive
and broadens the RPM spread.
> What I interpret that as saying is that they (Hilborn) have written a fuel
> map for you. Since you don't have a computer, or need a computer, you don't
> change it, or you simply can't change it.
The Hilborn system uses a computer to perform the fuel injection and requires
tuning but does not use a laptop as the user interface. My guess is it's like
the SDS (Simple Digital Systems) or the PMS (Programable Management System)
which use a handle held interface with buttons. This is a simpler but less
flexible approach.
> I think I started the "no 02 Sensor" stuff when I posted this quote from
> Hilborn a few days ago
There are three popular EFI control schemes:
1. mass air flow
2. speed density
3. alpha-n
None of them require an O2 sensor. A friend runs a mass-air Ford EEC-IV
without O2 sensors, for instance. All of the above control schemes can be
used with or without and O2 sensor. They differ primarily in the way they
sense engine load. Speed density systems use manifold vacuum via a MAP
(manifold absolute pressure) sensor to sense load. Fuel is metered using
the MAP input, engine RPM, and volumetric efficiency tables. Mass air
systems use a MAF (Mass Air Flow) sensor to directly measure the amount of
incoming air. Those sensors typically use wires that air exposed to the
air flow. As the air flows over the wire, it changes the voltage drop
across the wire. Tables in the computer convert the voltage drop to air
mass. Alpha-N systems are the simplest, using only RPM and throttle position
to determine load. Note that a MAP sensor can be used with Alpha-N, but it's
used as a barometric pressure sensor to detect altitude changes. You can
also blend the authority of Alpha-N and speed density by weighting the
authority between the throttle position sensor and the MAP (manifold
absolute pressure) sensor.
> How did the performance change on the classic mustang when switching from
> carb to EEC-IV. Did you get smoother running, more power and better fuel
> economy??
When the stock long runner Ford 5.0L EFI intake is swapped over, you
generally get better low end torque at the expense of higher RPM power.
A shorter runner intake can gain the high RPM power back. Part throttle
fuel economy is generally improved but highway cruise fuel economy can be
slightly better with a well-tuned carb. This is because the car can be
tuned to e lean under those conditions. This can be done with the Ford EFI
system but requires some modification. Cold start-up and idle are generally
improved.
> Just how common is this stuff in breakers yards in the US?
Very common. Ford went SEFI on it's Mustang 5.0L in 1986. It's a straight-
forward swap on early Mustangs since they use the same engine. With a similar
overlap cam and displacement, little to no tuning is required. If you
substantially modify the engine or use a larger displacement engine, you'll
need one of the tuners (PMS, EECtuner, TwEECer, etc.) to get the maps correct.
Dan Jones
> IR manifold, camshaft overlap needs to be limited as much as possible.
I was referring to IR EFI which has no such limitation. Webers and non-timed
mechanical injection have that problem because they are constant flow. But
with SEFI, the fuel is not injected on the overlap pulse. I know guys running
260 degree duration (at 0.050" lift) cams with IR EFI and they have no problems
with reversion.
> The reversion from the valve overlap pushes the raw fuel back out of the
> stack.
Not if there isn't any fuel there to begin with. It also depends upon the
length of the stack (i.e. the harmonic you choose to tune). If you pick a
stack length that tunes at the first harmonic, the effect is strong in a
narrow RPM band. Tuning to the second or third harmonic is less sensitive
and broadens the RPM spread.
> What I interpret that as saying is that they (Hilborn) have written a fuel
> map for you. Since you don't have a computer, or need a computer, you don't
> change it, or you simply can't change it.
The Hilborn system uses a computer to perform the fuel injection and requires
tuning but does not use a laptop as the user interface. My guess is it's like
the SDS (Simple Digital Systems) or the PMS (Programable Management System)
which use a handle held interface with buttons. This is a simpler but less
flexible approach.
> I think I started the "no 02 Sensor" stuff when I posted this quote from
> Hilborn a few days ago
There are three popular EFI control schemes:
1. mass air flow
2. speed density
3. alpha-n
None of them require an O2 sensor. A friend runs a mass-air Ford EEC-IV
without O2 sensors, for instance. All of the above control schemes can be
used with or without and O2 sensor. They differ primarily in the way they
sense engine load. Speed density systems use manifold vacuum via a MAP
(manifold absolute pressure) sensor to sense load. Fuel is metered using
the MAP input, engine RPM, and volumetric efficiency tables. Mass air
systems use a MAF (Mass Air Flow) sensor to directly measure the amount of
incoming air. Those sensors typically use wires that air exposed to the
air flow. As the air flows over the wire, it changes the voltage drop
across the wire. Tables in the computer convert the voltage drop to air
mass. Alpha-N systems are the simplest, using only RPM and throttle position
to determine load. Note that a MAP sensor can be used with Alpha-N, but it's
used as a barometric pressure sensor to detect altitude changes. You can
also blend the authority of Alpha-N and speed density by weighting the
authority between the throttle position sensor and the MAP (manifold
absolute pressure) sensor.
> How did the performance change on the classic mustang when switching from
> carb to EEC-IV. Did you get smoother running, more power and better fuel
> economy??
When the stock long runner Ford 5.0L EFI intake is swapped over, you
generally get better low end torque at the expense of higher RPM power.
A shorter runner intake can gain the high RPM power back. Part throttle
fuel economy is generally improved but highway cruise fuel economy can be
slightly better with a well-tuned carb. This is because the car can be
tuned to e lean under those conditions. This can be done with the Ford EFI
system but requires some modification. Cold start-up and idle are generally
improved.
> Just how common is this stuff in breakers yards in the US?
Very common. Ford went SEFI on it's Mustang 5.0L in 1986. It's a straight-
forward swap on early Mustangs since they use the same engine. With a similar
overlap cam and displacement, little to no tuning is required. If you
substantially modify the engine or use a larger displacement engine, you'll
need one of the tuners (PMS, EECtuner, TwEECer, etc.) to get the maps correct.
Dan Jones
Another fascinating topic, my goodness..
The one stament frm DP that "Webers are tempremental" I absolutely have to disagree with thoo...tricky to set up yes, but if you have linkages that stay constant & dont loosen up / or change settings, once you get them right (4x vacume gauges ) they stay right and like the excellent presicion instruments they are, provide a great range of tunning possibilites, even here in JHB at over 6000 ft altitude.( Ive often travelled from here down to the coast without having to touch the WEBERS...and no, I am not a vendor trying to move WEBERS...I just love them.- And i dont mean only for track-days with a car that does very little millage,- i mean mundane street cars that run all day all week etc, - ask the italians......
Thought I'd just toss that into the interesting posting/tread.
Many thks agin to all you knowledgable gentleman, what would we do with out you .....
I have had a set of IDA's on my Cat for many, many yrs,- DCNF's with IR manifold on a 308 V8 Fizzer and numerous Alfas running horisontal DCOE's with NO tempamental displays ever.( for goodnes sake, run of the mill 4 door italian passenger cars have been built and run for ages all over the world fitted with mutiple Weber carbs with no tempementality occuring....a bit of a hassle to set up yes...and Webers are avaiable agin......
The one stament frm DP that "Webers are tempremental" I absolutely have to disagree with thoo...tricky to set up yes, but if you have linkages that stay constant & dont loosen up / or change settings, once you get them right (4x vacume gauges ) they stay right and like the excellent presicion instruments they are, provide a great range of tunning possibilites, even here in JHB at over 6000 ft altitude.( Ive often travelled from here down to the coast without having to touch the WEBERS...and no, I am not a vendor trying to move WEBERS...I just love them.- And i dont mean only for track-days with a car that does very little millage,- i mean mundane street cars that run all day all week etc, - ask the italians......
Thought I'd just toss that into the interesting posting/tread.
Many thks agin to all you knowledgable gentleman, what would we do with out you .....
I have had a set of IDA's on my Cat for many, many yrs,- DCNF's with IR manifold on a 308 V8 Fizzer and numerous Alfas running horisontal DCOE's with NO tempamental displays ever.( for goodnes sake, run of the mill 4 door italian passenger cars have been built and run for ages all over the world fitted with mutiple Weber carbs with no tempementality occuring....a bit of a hassle to set up yes...and Webers are avaiable agin......
quote:Originally posted by Rapier:
...George, How did the performance change on the classic mustang when switching from carb to EEC-IV? Did you get smoother running, more power and better fuel economy? Just how common is this stuff in breakers yards in the US?...
The greatest improvement is felt below 2000 rpm. The engine idles & runs much smoother, like no carburetor is capable of duplicating. Throttle response is more instantaneous. Around town fuel economy improves about 15%. There are no hitches or glitches in the power band as you accelerate. The motor pulls smoother and more consistently. There's no place where the "secondaries come in" which causes a surge in power, its just smooth pullig like an electric motor all the way through the powerband. There's no stumbling when accelerating out of a hard corner or during hard braking.
Breaker yard? Are you sure you blokes speak the same language as us Yanks? Ha, ha, ha .... Like Dan wrote, the parts are very common, Ford sold very many 5.0 liter Mustangs here in the US.
The engine I helped install fuel injection in was a 302 cubic inch (5.0 liter) Windsor, ported heads & bigger valves, Cobra intake manifold, the typical cam I always recommend to people with a power band of 2000 to 6000 rpm. The owner installed higher flow rate fuel injectors and a larger throttle body, and better shorty style headers. We did not have to modify the engine management system at all. The combination of a mass air flow sensor and an oxygen sensor makes the system very tolerant of performance modifications. The engine management system employs adaptive software, which gives it the capability to create new curves (tables) in response to changes you make to the motor. I think it's bitchen.
your friend on the DTBB
quote:Originally posted by Tai Krige:
Another fascinating topic, my goodness..
The one stament frm DP that "Webers are tempremental" I absolutely have to disagree with thoo...bit of a hassle to set up yes...and Webers are avaiable agin......
Ty you must be a very easy going guy, or you live in a climate that is constant.
Here in NY when we go from 98F degrees and 90% relative humidity to 65F and 20% humidity the change in the carbs is very, very noticiable. And do not forget winter at 15F with carbs with no chokes.
They also produce an exhaust that liken diesel soot.
I gotta visit SA.
Thanks Dan,
As I have a stock 351-CJ (I think!) a junk yard EFI system is an attractive idea. I ran my Sunbeam on a $10 junk yard electronic ignition system for years. It could be a cheap way for me to better fuel economony without sacrificing any bhp (I'm happy with the 308bhp I have).
Does the EEC-IV system control the sparks too or just the fuel?
Unfortunately Mustangs of any type are pretty rare in the breakers yards in the UK (I'll check out ebay).
How many $ would you expect to pay for this from a breakers yard in the US?
I'm with Tai on the subject of Webers, they can be reliable - I did 70,000 miles in my Rapier with twin 40 DCOEs. It ran better than with the Stombergs I had before. Got about 14 years trouble free use but they got rather temperamental in the last couple of years with a fault I never could find (maybe I was looking in the wrong place).
As I have a stock 351-CJ (I think!) a junk yard EFI system is an attractive idea. I ran my Sunbeam on a $10 junk yard electronic ignition system for years. It could be a cheap way for me to better fuel economony without sacrificing any bhp (I'm happy with the 308bhp I have).
Does the EEC-IV system control the sparks too or just the fuel?
Unfortunately Mustangs of any type are pretty rare in the breakers yards in the UK (I'll check out ebay).
How many $ would you expect to pay for this from a breakers yard in the US?
I'm with Tai on the subject of Webers, they can be reliable - I did 70,000 miles in my Rapier with twin 40 DCOEs. It ran better than with the Stombergs I had before. Got about 14 years trouble free use but they got rather temperamental in the last couple of years with a fault I never could find (maybe I was looking in the wrong place).
> We did not have to modify the engine management system at all.
That combo is still within the limitations of the basic EEC tables.
> The engine management system employs adaptive software, which gives it the
> capability to create new curves (tables) in response to changes you make to
> the motor.
but there are finite limits. We ran outside what the Mustang Cobra EEC-IV
could compensate for early on and run a piggyback controller that gets tuned
on the dyno and with a wide-band. Also, don't make the mistake that just
because something starts and runs smoothly that the air-fuel or spark tables
are anywhere near optimal. I tuned a Cobra over the weekend with my wide
band O2. It ran great on the street and ran an 11.88 second 1/4 mile but was
dangerously lean everywhere in the RPM range. He's been running it that way
for a long while so I hope he hasn't hurt the pistons but only time will tell.
I got him in the right ballpark and we'll head back to the dyno for final WOT
tuning.
> As I have a stock 351-CJ (I think!) a junk yard EFI system is an attractive
> idea. I ran my Sunbeam on a $10 junk yard electronic ignition system for
> years. It could be a cheap way for me to better fuel economony without
> sacrificing any bhp (I'm happy with the 308bhp I have).
If you keep the CJ cam, you should be within the limitation of the tables.
You might be pushing the limitations of the 19 lb/hr injectors though you
can always try them and see. With the mass-air EEC's, installing larger
injectors often means either re-calibrating the mass air sensor or
tweaking the conversion in the tables. Most upgrade to a larger throttle
body and mass air unit that is matched to the injectors they choose to run.
There are specific EEC-IV's calibrated for 24 lb/hr injectors (the Mustang
Cobra processor) but most are 19 lbs/hr. The standard 5.0L HO SEFI Mustang
was 225 HP and all the components are sized for that. Larger throttle bodies,
EGR spacers, mass air meters, intake manifolds, injectors, fuel pumps are
the norm when you up the power. It's all available but the cost can add up.
The intake manifolding won't work on your 351C. You can modify a carb intake
or try to adapt the 5.0L stuff using adapter plates or mill and drill a
351W lower.
> Does the EEC-IV system control the sparks too or just the fuel?
It controls the spark too. You set base timing with the distributor but
lock out the advance. The spark tables can only be change with an aftermarket
tuning device.
> Unfortunately Mustangs of any type are pretty rare in the breakers yards in
> the UK (I'll check out ebay).
Be aware that very similar looking systems were used on a variety of Ford
5.0L engines. Some were SEFI, others were not. A friend attempted to
swap in an Explorer 5.0L in for his truck 5.0L only to find the truck had
bank fire and a different firing order. Also, some were speed density and
others were MAF.
Dan Jones
That combo is still within the limitations of the basic EEC tables.
> The engine management system employs adaptive software, which gives it the
> capability to create new curves (tables) in response to changes you make to
> the motor.
but there are finite limits. We ran outside what the Mustang Cobra EEC-IV
could compensate for early on and run a piggyback controller that gets tuned
on the dyno and with a wide-band. Also, don't make the mistake that just
because something starts and runs smoothly that the air-fuel or spark tables
are anywhere near optimal. I tuned a Cobra over the weekend with my wide
band O2. It ran great on the street and ran an 11.88 second 1/4 mile but was
dangerously lean everywhere in the RPM range. He's been running it that way
for a long while so I hope he hasn't hurt the pistons but only time will tell.
I got him in the right ballpark and we'll head back to the dyno for final WOT
tuning.
> As I have a stock 351-CJ (I think!) a junk yard EFI system is an attractive
> idea. I ran my Sunbeam on a $10 junk yard electronic ignition system for
> years. It could be a cheap way for me to better fuel economony without
> sacrificing any bhp (I'm happy with the 308bhp I have).
If you keep the CJ cam, you should be within the limitation of the tables.
You might be pushing the limitations of the 19 lb/hr injectors though you
can always try them and see. With the mass-air EEC's, installing larger
injectors often means either re-calibrating the mass air sensor or
tweaking the conversion in the tables. Most upgrade to a larger throttle
body and mass air unit that is matched to the injectors they choose to run.
There are specific EEC-IV's calibrated for 24 lb/hr injectors (the Mustang
Cobra processor) but most are 19 lbs/hr. The standard 5.0L HO SEFI Mustang
was 225 HP and all the components are sized for that. Larger throttle bodies,
EGR spacers, mass air meters, intake manifolds, injectors, fuel pumps are
the norm when you up the power. It's all available but the cost can add up.
The intake manifolding won't work on your 351C. You can modify a carb intake
or try to adapt the 5.0L stuff using adapter plates or mill and drill a
351W lower.
> Does the EEC-IV system control the sparks too or just the fuel?
It controls the spark too. You set base timing with the distributor but
lock out the advance. The spark tables can only be change with an aftermarket
tuning device.
> Unfortunately Mustangs of any type are pretty rare in the breakers yards in
> the UK (I'll check out ebay).
Be aware that very similar looking systems were used on a variety of Ford
5.0L engines. Some were SEFI, others were not. A friend attempted to
swap in an Explorer 5.0L in for his truck 5.0L only to find the truck had
bank fire and a different firing order. Also, some were speed density and
others were MAF.
Dan Jones
Rapier, hi there.
Yes u are right, I have had an occasion wen the webers went 'wonky' on me. ..over feuling the cylinders and eventually causing a 'oil wash away' & re-build, but it was my fault for spotting it so late...the carb bodies do wear causing slop / gaps twixt the choke-tubes and bodies, messing evrything up. However, a quick-fix popp-in of an appropreat sized O ring in a grove between the two, sealed it all up tight with out having to replace anything....This was not on my Pantera but my son's racing Golf Mk1 with DCOEs like yours and since there were very few parts available for Webers then, (not now thk goodness ) we went that route...yea, my IDA's are about as old as your Rapier's DCOE's, and no trouble so far. But as the man says .... we dont live in N.Y. ( I did for 3yrs and know what he means...) almost as bad as your weather hey in the UK...Boy I love South Africa....
Yes u are right, I have had an occasion wen the webers went 'wonky' on me. ..over feuling the cylinders and eventually causing a 'oil wash away' & re-build, but it was my fault for spotting it so late...the carb bodies do wear causing slop / gaps twixt the choke-tubes and bodies, messing evrything up. However, a quick-fix popp-in of an appropreat sized O ring in a grove between the two, sealed it all up tight with out having to replace anything....This was not on my Pantera but my son's racing Golf Mk1 with DCOEs like yours and since there were very few parts available for Webers then, (not now thk goodness ) we went that route...yea, my IDA's are about as old as your Rapier's DCOE's, and no trouble so far. But as the man says .... we dont live in N.Y. ( I did for 3yrs and know what he means...) almost as bad as your weather hey in the UK...Boy I love South Africa....
One more question to u learned folk.
I keep hearing about "cheap" Stroker kits for 351C frm China! Where do u buy these? and +- how much?,...... From the 'normal' vendors? I tried for many months to find a suitable 3.895 / 4" kit, but was unsuceesfull.....not cheap at all....and yes, in atticpation of fitting the stroker, I cammed up quite conservately: Sig Erson Hyd. 298 degrees (as advertized ) but with 5,50 lift with flat tops and the Webers & 180 exh. Runs gr8 as is at 351,( 2500 - 6000rpm's ) but as we all have been told the 4V closed chamber hds can use more cubes......
4.125 & 4.00 with 6" rods as our 'Wunderkind' George recomends?... Where from? I need an assembled/balanced complete kit....there arent many Ford Cleveland motor builders here..., KISS hey !
I keep hearing about "cheap" Stroker kits for 351C frm China! Where do u buy these? and +- how much?,...... From the 'normal' vendors? I tried for many months to find a suitable 3.895 / 4" kit, but was unsuceesfull.....not cheap at all....and yes, in atticpation of fitting the stroker, I cammed up quite conservately: Sig Erson Hyd. 298 degrees (as advertized ) but with 5,50 lift with flat tops and the Webers & 180 exh. Runs gr8 as is at 351,( 2500 - 6000rpm's ) but as we all have been told the 4V closed chamber hds can use more cubes......
4.125 & 4.00 with 6" rods as our 'Wunderkind' George recomends?... Where from? I need an assembled/balanced complete kit....there arent many Ford Cleveland motor builders here..., KISS hey !
Derek,
As of this time there are no fuel injection manifolds you can buy and bolt onto a 351C that would allow you to swap to an EEC-IV system, however there are ways around this dilemma.
Two Pantera owners, Thomas Tornblom of Sweden and Jim Murch of northern California have modified the lower half of a 351W fuel injection manifold from Trick Flow allowing it to mate with the Cleveland engine & heads. Thomas' conversion was on an Australian motor with 2V style heads, Jim's conversion was on a Cleveland with 4V heads. The manifold modifications were extensive and expensive. But the results are BITCHEN.
Thomas has a web site were he details the conversion, its good reading:
http://www.detomaso.nu/~thomast/efi/
Jim's conversion has caught the attention of Trick Flow, and they are promising a fuel injection manifold for the 351C, with 2V size ports. The manifold will most likely be introduced at the same time they introduce the 351C 2V heads they are working on to compete with the new Edelbrock heads.
Quality Roadsters sells complete systems or components that allow a mass air flow fuel injection system to be installed in such a way that it looks like a carbureted system. The system installs on single plane intakes modified to allow installation of fuel injectors. The cool factor of this system is that it maintains the "look" of the stock motor, so its very "stealthy"!
The fuel injection conversion business has grown so big for Quality Roadsters, that they have split it off as a separate company called Mass Flo EFI:
http://www.mass-floefi.com/
CHP and others sell a "power elbow" that bolts on the carburetor mounting pad of a single plane intake manifold. Like the Quality roadsters system, the manifold must be modified to allow the installation of fuel injectors. This system differs from the Quality Roadsters approach in that it does not require a proprietary throttle body or MAF sensor, it employs the standard throttle bodies & MAF sensors designed for the 5.0 liter Ford Mustang motor.
All of these EEC-IV conversions require the use of a "TFI" style distributor. The usual donor is the distributor from a fuel injected 460 cubic inch motor from a Ford pick up truck. That particular distributor employs a remote TFI module, so some folks modify other Ford distributors with integral modules to fit the 351C.
Your friend on the DTBB
As of this time there are no fuel injection manifolds you can buy and bolt onto a 351C that would allow you to swap to an EEC-IV system, however there are ways around this dilemma.
Two Pantera owners, Thomas Tornblom of Sweden and Jim Murch of northern California have modified the lower half of a 351W fuel injection manifold from Trick Flow allowing it to mate with the Cleveland engine & heads. Thomas' conversion was on an Australian motor with 2V style heads, Jim's conversion was on a Cleveland with 4V heads. The manifold modifications were extensive and expensive. But the results are BITCHEN.
Thomas has a web site were he details the conversion, its good reading:
http://www.detomaso.nu/~thomast/efi/
Jim's conversion has caught the attention of Trick Flow, and they are promising a fuel injection manifold for the 351C, with 2V size ports. The manifold will most likely be introduced at the same time they introduce the 351C 2V heads they are working on to compete with the new Edelbrock heads.
Quality Roadsters sells complete systems or components that allow a mass air flow fuel injection system to be installed in such a way that it looks like a carbureted system. The system installs on single plane intakes modified to allow installation of fuel injectors. The cool factor of this system is that it maintains the "look" of the stock motor, so its very "stealthy"!
The fuel injection conversion business has grown so big for Quality Roadsters, that they have split it off as a separate company called Mass Flo EFI:
http://www.mass-floefi.com/
CHP and others sell a "power elbow" that bolts on the carburetor mounting pad of a single plane intake manifold. Like the Quality roadsters system, the manifold must be modified to allow the installation of fuel injectors. This system differs from the Quality Roadsters approach in that it does not require a proprietary throttle body or MAF sensor, it employs the standard throttle bodies & MAF sensors designed for the 5.0 liter Ford Mustang motor.
All of these EEC-IV conversions require the use of a "TFI" style distributor. The usual donor is the distributor from a fuel injected 460 cubic inch motor from a Ford pick up truck. That particular distributor employs a remote TFI module, so some folks modify other Ford distributors with integral modules to fit the 351C.
Your friend on the DTBB
Attachments
Images (1)
quote:Originally posted by Tai Krige:
...I need an assembled/balanced complete kit....there arent many Ford Cleveland motor builders here...
Tai, I think the best way for you to proceed would be to contact Mark McKeown of MME Racing in Maryland, ask him to assemble a kit and ship it to you. He can put all the pieces togther, go through the headaches of finding the parts, he has the knowledge to assemble a kit that will bolt together without any hidden problems to frustrate you.
http://www.mmeracing.com
telephone (310) 246-9225
your friend on the DTBB
Many, many thanks George. Trust you to make it simple, neat.
George & Dan,
Many thanks for the information.
Many thanks for the information.