'88 EFI on '64 289?

Discussion in 'Ranchero Tech Help' started by colnago, Feb 9, 2019.

  1. colnago

    colnago In Third Gear

    Messages:
    195
    Location:
    Ridgecrest, CA
    I found an EFI setup from an '88 Mustang. It includes everything (or so the ad says). I was just wondering how difficult this would be to wire into a '64 Ranchero. I'm sure I'd have to get a new fuel pump, and plumb in a return line, but would I be better off just getting something like the Holley Sniper?

    Just wondering,

    Joseph
     
  2. 5.0 Chero

    5.0 Chero Bahumbug Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,616
    Location:
    Prunetucky California
    that depends on what you are looking for
     
    Dyno, andrewok1 and Hillbilly like this.
  3. colnago

    colnago In Third Gear

    Messages:
    195
    Location:
    Ridgecrest, CA
    Ha! Good answer! I fell into a similar trap on my truck group once!

    Okay, I currently have a '64 Ranchero with an early 289 swapped in. It has a 2BBL intake, topped off with an Autolite 2100 carb. Occasionally, I consider swapping in an EFI system in place of the carb. The system I just ran across has the upper and lower intake manifolds, the fuel injectors, the wiring harness, and the computer. I don't think it has any sensors, or any kind of fuel pump.

    I've little doubt that the Holley Sniper would be an easier installation. Would I notice any performance or mileage differences between the two EFI options, assuming this was just a daily driver?

    Joseph
     
  4. beerbelly

    beerbelly In Maximum Overdrive SILVER MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,590
    Location:
    Portland OR
    I'd vote for the modern, practically plug 'n play Sniper vs. 31 year old FI tech.
     
  5. handy_andy_cv64

    handy_andy_cv64 In Maximum Overdrive SILVER MEMBER

    Messages:
    8,138
    Location:
    Everett, WA
    Sez yoo. If he gets everything in the purchase, it would give you what you need to run the EFI. The fuel delivery system is what you'd have to cobble together to feed it, and that's pressure and return. The upside, the A9L computer would be able to run the 289 with no problems, as long as it has the MAF sensor, especially if you change the cam, heads and exhaust.
     
  6. 5.0 Chero

    5.0 Chero Bahumbug Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,616
    Location:
    Prunetucky California
    ask your self do any auto manufactures still use a cheaper CFI system? It is cheaper and easier to swap but you do not have true benefits of fuel injection. Your fuel still travels through the manifold, so you still wind up with uneven fuel distribution just like the carburetor. Also with the ford system you have timing controlled by the ECM.
     
    uk ranchero likes this.
  7. colnago

    colnago In Third Gear

    Messages:
    195
    Location:
    Ridgecrest, CA
    That's an interesting point. I know that some of the Ford manifolds have the input ports in a straight line, and some of them are staggered in kind of a zig-zag pattern. Do you know if either one is "better?"

    Joseph
     
  8. handy_andy_cv64

    handy_andy_cv64 In Maximum Overdrive SILVER MEMBER

    Messages:
    8,138
    Location:
    Everett, WA
    That depends on the amount of degrees in the V-block. A Windsor block is 60*, so two interconnected rails do the job, but on, say, a 2.9 or 4.0L OHV engine, the injectors are alternated between the intake runners, in order to make everything fit. The essential point is that a standard factory engine needs the injectors spraying into the intake valve. Engines that are modified need the injector bungs a bit farther from the intake valves (find a pic of a tunnel ram smallblock, and note where the injectors are located, vs. a stock smallblock's injectors). For your 289, you'd be using the 5.0 intake, with the injectors where they are located from the factory.
     
  9. 5.0 Chero

    5.0 Chero Bahumbug Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,616
    Location:
    Prunetucky California
  10. pmrphil

    pmrphil In Overdrive GOLD MEMBER

    Messages:
    771
    You would HAVE to change the cam - the firing orders are different. The Ford computer would fire the injectors (and the plugs) in the 5.0 firing order, not the 289, unless it's bankfire, like the non-mass air systems.
     
  11. colnago

    colnago In Third Gear

    Messages:
    195
    Location:
    Ridgecrest, CA
    Got it! I didn't realize the 289 and 5.0 firing order were different. I'll Google it, but do you know when Ford made that change? I thought the 289 and 302 were the same order. I'm an old FE truck guy, so the more I learn about the small blocks, the more I learn that I have more to learn!

    On edit, it looks like it changed in '95, when Ford went with the 5.0 EFI. Lots of opinions as to why Ford did this, though.

    Editing my edit, it looks like it's one of those "it depends" arguments. I ran into dates as early as '82 and as late as '95. Still learning!

    Joseph
     
    Last edited: Feb 11, 2019
  12. handy_andy_cv64

    handy_andy_cv64 In Maximum Overdrive SILVER MEMBER

    Messages:
    8,138
    Location:
    Everett, WA
    As long as the EFI firing order is the same as your 289, it's no sweat. And, it should be '94 and earlier, at least it is for truck 5.0's, but I have access to a reference database at my city's library. I'll chase it down for Mustangs, as that is what you want.
     
  13. handy_andy_cv64

    handy_andy_cv64 In Maximum Overdrive SILVER MEMBER

    Messages:
    8,138
    Location:
    Everett, WA
    Okay, found it. Any Mustangs with the HO 302/5.0L engine, the firing order is the same as the 351/5.8L Windsor. All other 5.0L engines get this firing order (such as my Exploder) in '95.
     
  14. handy_andy_cv64

    handy_andy_cv64 In Maximum Overdrive SILVER MEMBER

    Messages:
    8,138
    Location:
    Everett, WA
    So, yes, your 289 would require a cam change to work, if you use a Mustang setup. If you used a Crown Vic setup, up to 1991, you would not have to change the cam. However, you might not have the MAF with it.
     
  15. plumcolr

    plumcolr In Maximum Overdrive

    Messages:
    1,237
    Location:
    Freehold NJ
    I understand the desire to use an cam that uses the correct firing order but could you not just rewire the injectors to match the different firing order? And if the cams are swapped a later roller lifter would probably be better. I know that messes with the stock wiring harness but it's really a minor rewire.
     
  16. pmrphil

    pmrphil In Overdrive GOLD MEMBER

    Messages:
    771
    The firing order is part of the computer programming - in that computer it can't be changed, so changing injector fire won't help. To change to an EFI cam it would HAVE to be a retro - style cam/lifter package. Kinda pricey. You could change to a 351 order flat lifter cam, though. Speed density engines (early Mustangs and trucks) have a different firing order than mass air vehicles.
     
  17. colnago

    colnago In Third Gear

    Messages:
    195
    Location:
    Ridgecrest, CA
    Theoretically, does the firing order matter that much? If I had two identical engines, except for cams and firing order, would I see any performance differences? I can use an "EFI cam" in a carbed engine, couldn't I?

    Joseph
     
  18. LSChero

    LSChero In Maximum Overdrive PLATINUM MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,003
    Location:
    Area 6 NV
    What is this guy asking for harness/manifolds?
     
  19. handy_andy_cv64

    handy_andy_cv64 In Maximum Overdrive SILVER MEMBER

    Messages:
    8,138
    Location:
    Everett, WA
    If you're looking for a lot of performance, yes, there would be a difference. But if you're looking for turn-key driveability, with only a smidge of giddy-up, not really.
     
    colnago likes this.
  20. colnago

    colnago In Third Gear

    Messages:
    195
    Location:
    Ridgecrest, CA
    $400. It would probably cost more than that to install, but it would still come in cheaper than something new. But the good thing with new is that it's new.

    Joseph
     

Share This Page