which would it have? i found a couple tech articles explicitly saying it's EEC-IV, but a guy on SBF Tech PM'd me, insisting it's EEC-III and he's willing to bet all of this auto knowledge on it.. aren't the square pre-82 birds the 1's with EEC-III's?
you will have EEC-III I am pretty sure EEC-IV came in the 86?
here's the easy way to put this to rest.. is the EEC-IV for TBI or MFI? 85 was the last year for CFI/TBI and 86 began the MFI/multi port.. i'm going to drop kick the people who wrote the pages i was reading if the IV is an MFI ecu
that is what I understand.
a quick ebay search shows some 84-85 EEC-IV's and some '85-94' EEC-IV's.. sooo, is it possible that the EEC-IV was used in the 83 5.0 bird, since it was a mid model year launch? the 5.0 and TC birds weren't released until feb of 83
83 5.0 CFI EEC III, 83 Turbo EEC IV, 83 3.8 Carb.
Early 84 5.0 CFI for California EEC III.
All other 84 -88 CFI, EFI and Turbo EEC IV
Except for Canada which had Carbs on 83-85 5.0 and 3.8
so, in other words.. with the EEC-III, the ignition would be run off a module(ICM) like so.. correct?
(http://info.rockauto.com/getimage/getimage.php?imagekey=1981496&imageurl=http%3A//info.rockauto.com/at/C2CC0131211213798352.jpg)
Yes. It uses a Duraspark III ignition module.
Also the distributor has no stator or hall effect emitter and no vacuum advance. So the only wires to the distributor are the plug wires and the coil wire. There is no timing adjustment.
A crankshaft position sensor sends a PIP pulse to the EEC. The EEC sends a spark out pulse to the ignition module.
no wonder these cars old had 140hp.. they were set up so retarded.. playing with this thing is NOT going to be fun.. lol
tell me about it, can't wait to rip it out and raplace it with a HO motor :P
i don't have that option with this car, since it's not mine and is staying 100% original to the detailed eye.. it's either i find a way to make it work or build a mega squirt ECU to be compatible with the OEM harness, but i reeeeeeaaaaaaallllllllllllllllly don't want to take that route
so far, from the info i've gotten from sbf tech and some googling (and the tidbit of info here), it looks like the best bet is to upgrade to EEC-IV and disguise the harness as the EEC-III setup.. the AC bracket and compressor will hide the distributor module. the rest i can run under the hood to look exactly like the stock EEC-III harness and leave the duraspark III ICM in it's place, with a dumby harness
Sounds interesting, keep us posted.
there will be a large thread with tons of pics of the car.. it's a full on resto i'm doing for a member here
No they had no power because the auto makers were scrambling to to meet safety, emissions & MPG requirements mandated by the Fed, performance took a backseat... The thought in in the late 70/early '80s was V8s were good as dead so performance research went into the 2.3 OHC, those had been turbocharged using a carb as early as '79... By '83 V8 performance was making a strong come back via carbed Mustangs... As far as performance, the EEC-III system was already obsolete by the time it was introduced...
Swapping to EEC-IV is no doubt the way to go, one of these days parts for the III system will be impossible to find...
that's just another plus on top of the other benefits, like diagnostics, tuneability, instant power gain by using an LTD LX setup (HO firing order) and the likelihood of someone being able to chip/tune or at least tinker with the ecu
alright, some updates based on the info me and the owner of the car have tracked down through the wonderful world of internet searching ;)
the LTD LX harness and EEC are out the window, 1 of the tech pages suggests not using a factory HO setup in a non-HO factory car, i assume the harness is different.
so these are the specs of the direction it's going (as of now, unless i find someone to tune the EEC-IV)
- 84-85 harness out of a non-HO fox body car (LTD, mustang base or bird)
- non-HO EEC-IV out of the same car
- upgrade to mildly ported E7's (basically just some casting cleanup and polishing)
- same treatment for the intake and manifolds
- HO cam, non-roller (unless for some reason it turns out to be a roller block, which i highly doubt
- true duals with custom xpipe, both running down the passenger side and into a dual in/out flowmaster and exiting in the stock location
- injector upgrade to the 52# LTD LX HO injectors
- POSSIBLY underdrive pulleys, IF i can find a setup that'll keep the 3 belt setup
- a small compression bump (from 8.4:1 to 8.6-8.8:1)
- and a little bottom end balancing
Unless you get a tune you'll need the larger throttlebody and matching EEC for those 52Lb injectors...
The automatic '84-'85 Mustangs had the same(similar?) HO CFI setup to the LSC and the LTD LX... No std CFI Stangs, period...
i found a lot of factory specs on base stangs, saying the base cfi cars were non-ho.. no matter, it'll be a crown vic i rob the harness and EEC from, since there are about 15 of them in my local junkyard. (they're just junk beater cars in this area, there's no fanbase what-so-ever for these cars.. i'm not a fan of them either).. but with the 52# injectors, will be the throttle body they belong in.. i can't find specs on this throttle body anywhere, so i poked around on advance auto's site (or autozone, whichever) and it was the same part number for all cfi cars.. but all LTD's had the 52# injector part numbers.. i'm wondering if the advance or autozone part numbers are incorrect for the LTD or bird and the LTD tb is bigger.. either way, the LTD throttle body is going to be part of the swap, to avoid any complications with any sensors.. the throttle bodies show no obvious difference in barrel size, but it may only be a mm or 2 and basically unseen by the naked eye.. we shall see when i have them side by side and break out my digital caliper ;)
Well I've never seen a '84-'85 CFI 5.0 Stang that wasn't HO, includes a base notch, can't believe everything in the books...
Also I can't believe they didn't use a larger throttlebody with the 52Lb inj... Search around here(if you can get it to work), seems I remember someone playing around with the CFI HO pieces, may have been jcassety...
i'm not saying they are the same TB, i agree that they should be bigger.. but advance or autozone lists the same part number for the bird and LTD.. we'll just have to see once i have the 2 side by side and check them with my caliper. and if all 84-85 stangs were indeed all HO, it means finding a non-roller HO cam will be a breeze. at this point, it's just going with a stock HO cam to keep things from getting too complicated, because i highly doubt my luck is going to turn for the better in finding someone who is able to tune these things, which is a bit of a downer
A page from the 84 Shop Manual. For what it's worth.
see! some guy on 4ep told me all stangs were HO.. this chart shows standard 5.0's in the stang.. i'm stealing this, thanks lol
That chart is BS! Can someone please explain to me how in hell a 84 Cougar 5.0 CFI can have a 2150 2BL as well as electronic fuel injection.
it means either, not both lol
If you're concerned how a TFI distributor will look, you can use a setup from a 94-95 Mustang GT or 91-93 Thunderbird 5.0 with the remote mount ignition module.
indeeeeeeeed.. i could hollow out the duraspark III and hide the module in it.. interesting.. may just have to do that
Notice the footnote that indicates that the carb is for Canada.
....again misinformation....mine is Canadian and came with CFI! The exception may be for a Thunderbird...who knows?
There was a difference between the throttle bores on the V6's and V8's, but not between the "HO" and non-HO ones.
no, but the LTD's have larger injectors (52# vs 46# in the birds/stangs).. possibly meaning the throttle body is bigger.. maybe not by much, but we'll see once i have a couple of them side by side
just thought of something.. isn't the 3.8 CFI EEC-IV harness the same as the 5.0? just the harness, i know there's obviously a difference in injector size, TB size and EEC.. reason i ask, i may be buying an 85-ish (not 100% certain the door tag is correct to the car) bird with a dead 3.8, if the guy will take my offer..
if they're indeed the same, i think i just might go with my plan of dropping a 302 in it and attempt to tinker with the EEC-IV system to nail down a solid setup, before installing it in the heritage and converting this car to carb.. crossing my fingers that he accepts 350-450 for the car