Technical => Engine Tech => Topic started by: jcassity on August 14, 2017, 02:25:26 PM
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: jcassity on August 14, 2017, 02:25:26 PM
88 bird with 5.0L with explorer parts & AOD.
Vinnie Tbird Mass air computer which was supposed to be an A9P equal, not sure what brand it is,,, says its a Reman.
Mass meter & injectors from MK8 (blue top injectors)
We followed the coolcats instructions and got the mass air upgrade done to my sons silver 88bird., he's in for the week and we have a list of things to do and mass air is one.
No engine light coming on so i assume no codes. Difference from SD to Mass Air changes: -off the line there is a significant hesitation off the line. Fuel presure is fine, fuel pump was upgraded to something around 160LPH year before last.
Anyone have hesitation on Mass air upgrade and what did you find to be causing it?
could be a dirty mass air sensor?
where do we start without any check engine light , meaning no codes ???? Map sensor vac line is unplugged and capped off.
we are out working on it now,, 304 772 3411 if you just want to tell us verbally..
thanks!!
scott & mason cassity
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: thunderjet302 on August 14, 2017, 03:41:21 PM
Quote from: jcassity;462171
Mass meter & injectors from MK8 (blue top injectors)
So the injectors and MAF are from a Mark VIII? If so you CAN NOT USE THE MARK VIII MAF WITHOUT A TUNE. IT IS NOT CALIBRATED TO THE INJECTORS. Injector calibration is done inside the Ford EEC. So to run 24lb injectors on a stock A9P style processor (set up for 19lb injectors) you have two options:
1. Tune the computer using a tuner, like Moates Quarterhorse: http://www.moates.net/quarterhorse-for-fords-p-199.html
2. Use an aftermarket MAF calibrated to the injector size. It "tricks" the computer so you can run 24lb injectors with a computer programmed for 19lb injectors: https://lmr.com/item/PMA-12579AE/1989-93-Mustang-50L-75Mm-Black-Pro-M-Mass-Air-Meter-For-24Lb
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: grutinator on August 14, 2017, 07:35:35 PM
What he said. Everything really needs to be on the same page. Moates is definitely good advise if you plan on adding alot of power or changing parameters later on, I wish I went that route. That said, the quick and easy aftermarket MAF does work well.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: thunderjet302 on August 14, 2017, 07:47:02 PM
Actually option 3: stick the 19lb injectors back in and run a stock 89-93 Mustang MAF. Then after you either get a tuner (harder option) or calibrated MAF (easier option) put the 24lb injectors back in.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: rotorr22 on August 14, 2017, 08:01:17 PM
Quote from: thunderjet302;462191
Actually option 3: stick the 19lb injectors back in and run a stock 89-93 Mustang MAF. Then after you either get a tuner (harder option) or calibrated MAF (easier option) put the 24lb injectors back in.
You must have been reading my mind. Used MAF sensors can often be found on craigslist when people upgrade to turbo's or blowers.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: jcassity on August 14, 2017, 08:56:20 PM
in your bold print,, i will reword so pls tell me if this is what you meant..... you said " IT IS NOT CALIBRATED TO THE INJECTORS"
What i think i take away is " The EEC is not calibrated to the injectors"
correct?
Reading the coolcats instructions, there wasnt a warning about the computer matching the maf. I was under the impression you need the maf and matching injectors on a car then hook it up to a maf ready computer.
Im thinking we back down to speed density HO and add the PP intake and stay out of this maf thing. nobody's life seems to be that easy when they go maf anyway.
oddly the car runs really good.
I dont know what you mean by "get a calibrated maf",, thought we had that.
do you mean "get a special maf for 24lb injectors made to trick the eec into thinking they are actually 19lb?
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: TurboCoupe50 on August 14, 2017, 09:04:28 PM
Quote from: jcassity;462198
I dont know what you mean by "get a calibrated maf",, thought we had that. do you mean "get a special maf for 24lb injectors made to trick the eec into thinking they are actually 19lb?
That's what's required...
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: jcassity on August 14, 2017, 09:15:42 PM
i see the $204 link now
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: jcassity on August 14, 2017, 09:50:50 PM
from my other stock pile of parts i think i have a calibrated maf for EECIV to run 24lb injectors.. this extra Maf is intended to run on my younger son's (chance) 331 .030 over coug motor but i suppose we could borrow it over to my oldest son "mason" to see if it works.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: thunderjet302 on August 14, 2017, 11:59:37 PM
Quote from: jcassity;462198
in your bold print,, i will reword so pls tell me if this is what you meant..... you said " IT IS NOT CALIBRATED TO THE INJECTORS"
What i think i take away is " The EEC is not calibrated to the injectors"
correct?
No the EEC is "calibrated" to the injectors. An A9P is set up to fire 19lb injectors. No factory Ford MAF is calibrated to an injector size. The same stock MAF from an 89 to 93 5.0 Mustang used with 19lb injectors is also used in 89 to 93 Thunderbird SCs with a supercharged 3.8 V6 and 30lb injectors.
All the computer knows is the size of the stock injectors and how much air is flowing through the MAF at certain voltage points (i.e. the MAFs transfer function). By putting 24lb injectors and the MAF from a Mark VIII in the EEC is having two issues. First the transfer function of the Mark VIII's MAF is no where close to the stock MAF. The EEC has no idea what to do with the information it is receiving. Second it's dumping too much fuel into the engine, since firing a 24lb injector for the same amount of time as a 19lb injector is going to provide more fuel. Hence why your son's car is running like .
So what an aftermarket MAF that's "calibrated" does is lie to the computer. An aftermarket MAF calibrated for 24lb injectors in a 1990 Mustang that came with 19lb injectors stock outputs a voltage signal to the EEC that is19/24 of the stock MAF. This allows the computer to fire the larger injectors without overfueling.
Aftermarket MAF calibration is important without a tune. If you're not sure what setup the MAF you have is calibrated for I would suggest buying a new one that is set up for your intake system. A 24lb calibrated MAF for a 89 to 93 5.0 Mustang will not work with 24lb injectors in a 1998 Mustang. The MAF also has to be setup for the stock airbox, a conical filter clamped to the end of the MAF, or a bend in front of the MAF. If you don't know what MAF you have in your 331 parts pile don't use it.
To run the 24lb injectors grab a stock airbox and the MAF I linked. I bet it solves your problem for good.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: thunderjet302 on August 15, 2017, 12:03:24 AM
Read this link: http://www.efidynotuning.com/maf101.htm
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: vinnietbird on August 15, 2017, 07:29:51 AM
I use a '93 Cobra X3Z computer in my Sport. It's calibrated to 24# injectors.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: jcassity on August 15, 2017, 08:31:42 AM
Quote from: thunderjet302;462205
. If you don't know what MAF you have in your 331 parts pile don't use it. .
Its a pro-m maf. it has no sn, pn
i am calling the oem today to find out the application.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: jcassity on August 15, 2017, 11:00:16 AM
actually it does have pn, sn & calibration code, was hand written but almost gone ,,
got it & intake & computer from here.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: jcassity on August 15, 2017, 11:05:42 AM
also,, the car is *not* running like either with the MK8 & 24lb injectors on the A9P eec
I think i mentioned the only issue is slight 1/2 second hesitation from idle to quick throttle.... like a communications delay or something.
Anyway,,
pic of our maf coming up here in a few.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: jcassity on August 15, 2017, 11:10:32 AM
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: thunderjet302 on August 15, 2017, 11:32:52 AM
Quote from: jcassity;462221
also,, the car is *not* running like either with the MK8 & 24lb injectors on the A9P eec
I think i mentioned the only issue is slight 1/2 second hesitation from idle to quick throttle.... like a communications delay or something.
Anyway,,
pic of our maf coming up here in a few.
99.999999% chance that is caused by the Mark VIII MAF. I guarantee it. Running the Mark VIII MAF without a tune will screw up a bunch of things with fuel control/load calculations. No matter what you do that Mark VIII MAF will not work without a tune.
I looked at that MAF. You need to find out if it's set up for the stock airbox or a conical filter clamped to the end of the MAF. They have slightly different flow curves depending on what is in front of the MAF. Most of the time a MAF like what you purchased is set up for the stock airbox. Most of the time.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: thunderjet302 on August 15, 2017, 11:39:25 AM
Also read this, all 3 sections: https://web.archive.org/web/20150225073218/http://www.cnlperformance.com:80/MAF_info.php?section=10
It'll help explain why all this stuff I'm talking about is important.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: jcassity on August 15, 2017, 01:15:38 PM
Quote from: thunderjet302;462224
Also read this, all 3 sections: https://web.archive.org/web/20150225073218/http://www.cnlperformance.com:80/MAF_info.php?section=10
It'll help explain why all this stuff I'm talking about is important.
im going with your word on it,,, i trust your info.
I will ask Flipnbird about the air box but we do have either the stock air box or conical for more volume if required.
Q- how do we know if i have a shaged up set up if its not running bad or throwing codes?
The mk8 maf & 24lb inj were not tossing codes and we were not rich
we are now installing this other PMaf from Flipnbird with his injectors (even though his and the mk8's both read 13.7ohms),
if it runs better how will we know especially when things seemed good before? except for that common hesistation even mentioned on the cobra EEC ford muscle complained about as well
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: thunderjet302 on August 15, 2017, 01:44:39 PM
I had a bad MAF that was leaning out and causing a bad hesitation off the line. Didn't throw any codes but when I back probed the O2 sensors at the EEC harness you could see they were showing lean to the EEC. I swapped in another MAF and the issue went away. No codes were thrown in that case as everything was "in spec" but lean.
You shouldn't have to swap the injectors, just the MAF should be good.
Edit:
Ohming the MAF does nothing for you at this point. You'd want to back probe the MAF connector and see what reading (voltage) it's putting out at idle, 1000rpm, 2000rpm, 3000rpm, etc.
Also stop trying to use the Mark VIII MAF without a tune. The Mark VIII MAF will not work with an A9P without a computer tune, no matter what you do.
If it's running good the hesitation will go away. I'm running a calibrated MAF for 30lb injectors on an A9P and 30lb red top FRPP injectors, no tune. There is NO hesitation anywhere at any throttle angle.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: flipnbird on August 16, 2017, 07:17:40 AM
@ jcassity.....Yes that pro-m mass air is for 24lb injectors. I had that whole set up(ported cobra, 24's) I sold you in my bird and it ran VERY well. The mass air was bought new and was only a couple tears old when i sold to you
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: thunderjet302 on August 16, 2017, 10:09:52 AM
Did you use the MAF with the stock airbox or a conical filter clamped to the end?
Depending on which way the MAF is set up jcassity will have to run it the same way.
This should resolve the issue.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: TurboCoupe50 on August 16, 2017, 11:01:37 AM
It's possible to have the lag with a MAF that's correct for injectors and ECM, but wrong for application...
When the MAF ped the bed on the '95 4.6 Bird we had a few months I installed a stock one for '92 Stang, idled fine, crused fine but had the off idle stumble upon opening throttle... It eventually set a code, was so bad you'd swear it would die but never did, one from a similar year V6 Bird fixed it...
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on August 16, 2017, 07:43:33 PM
If you're futzing around with calibrated MAF's, you are almost ALWAYS going to have a hesitation in a car with an automatic. The MAF is a load sensor. When you're using a calibrated MAF, you CAN get the fuel right, but it skews the load calc. In EECIV, load is not percent load by default, and is instead VE. Which means when your load is miscalculated, your spark advance is wrong. You're under advancing. Additionally, unless the A9P has a chip of any kind where the Injector lo and hi slopes, breakpoint, and voltage offsets are altered for 24# injectors, and the MAF transfer function for the Mark's MAF has been substituted, it's never going to be right. Beyond that, GT40 heads have different knock characteristics, so your spark base table need to be altered as well as the sea level table and the altitude table (if you aren't setup to disable them) or you're going to get spark knock; especially in high ambient temps.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: Aerocoupe on August 16, 2017, 10:45:49 PM
Another issue is the Ford EEC IV's were not designed to run on fuel with 10% ethanol. They only have about +/- 12.5% adaptive control and they max out fairly quick when folks add on the bolt-ons and then add in the lack luster fuel we have now. Anymore the best thing to do is get a tune or buy a tuner and get proficient with a wide band O2.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on August 16, 2017, 11:04:10 PM
One of the first things I did about that in my tune is to set the adaptives for max LTFT (KAMRF) from .850-1.15 to .750-1.25 and gave the same range to my STFT (LAMSE). Makes the car a bit more forgiving of my fuel choices.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: flipnbird on August 17, 2017, 11:03:03 AM
I had this ran with a cone filter on the end inside the passenger fender well...
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on August 17, 2017, 12:39:08 PM
Yeah, that will make a HUGE difference in the way the MAF reads. The really serious outfits that provide calibrated MAFs will provide a different MAF sample tube for cars with open cone filters.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: thunderjet302 on August 17, 2017, 04:24:45 PM
Quote from: flipnbird;462257
I had this ran with a cone filter on the end inside the passenger fender well...
With a bend in front like a cold air intake or with the filter clamped to the end of the MAF and the MAF and filter both in the fenderwell?
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: thunderjet302 on August 17, 2017, 04:29:02 PM
Quote from: TheFoeYouKnow;462246
If you're futzing around with calibrated MAF's, you are almost ALWAYS going to have a hesitation in a car with an automatic. The MAF is a load sensor. When you're using a calibrated MAF, you CAN get the fuel right, but it skews the load calc. In EECIV, load is not percent load by default, and is instead VE. Which means when your load is miscalculated, your spark advance is wrong. You're under advancing. Additionally, unless the A9P has a chip of any kind where the Injector lo and hi slopes, breakpoint, and voltage offsets are altered for 24# injectors, and the MAF transfer function for the Mark's MAF has been substituted, it's never going to be right. Beyond that, GT40 heads have different knock characteristics, so your spark base table need to be altered as well as the sea level table and the altitude table (if you aren't setup to disable them) or you're going to get spark knock; especially in high ambient temps.
You know oddly enough my car with 30lb FRPP redtop EV1 injectors and a 76mm C&L MAF calibrated for them runs great with no tune. No hesitation, no knocking, nothing. I run 16* base timing SPOUT out and 93 octane Shell gas. Runs just as good or better than my '12 Mustang or '17 Accord.
Is it the best way? No but it gets me by. I plan on getting a better MAF and a tune next year (was going to do that this year but blew all my car money on body work :hick:). I'm hoping it's worth the cost and I pick up a couple HP.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on August 17, 2017, 07:11:21 PM
C&L is a top shelf MAF. It's what I'm running. When I moved from a 30# stock airbox calibrated sample tube to a custom tune, I just called them and asked for the best sample tube for stock 19# injectors and the MAF transfer function table to use with it. They were most helpful. For me, the biggest problem in running a calibrated MAF was that I had GT40P heads, which have small chambers and strange burn characteristics, combined with KB domes. My compression ratio is 10.9:1 It might have been more friendly if I had better heads. Or even non-P GT40's.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: flipnbird on August 18, 2017, 08:50:58 AM
with the bend and the filter inside the fender well, like the pic you posted on the right.....
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: jcassity on August 18, 2017, 09:07:31 AM
some pics of work completed
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: jcassity on August 18, 2017, 09:08:58 AM
mason did up some vht hi temp "textured" valve cover paint,, it looks really good. hope its not a dust collector!
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: jcassity on August 18, 2017, 09:17:16 AM
MK8 Maf has been off to the side as a spare part in my bins, used Flipnbird's maf & the MK8 injectors. both MK8 injectors and Flipnbirds were the same resistance,, 13.6ohms. Using flipnbirds upper/lower on my other son's 331 build.
used the PP Upper / Lower on mason's bird since runner area was larger + positive writing from fordmuscle testing out the pp to the cobra and picking up better 1/8 mile time slips. mason's bird is a simple 030 over block, old explorer iron heads with some work, so nothing special for power other than HO stuff. he has a track lock 2.73 out back and wants something 373 or even 410,, im saying 355 or even 327 would be a much better choice and streetable.
after several test hits using vinnie's A9P like reman EEC and one of the few A9L's i have,, Mason picked the a9p but the differences were so tiny its not noticeable.
from what i am reading, and what mason needs to learn up on is unlocking any more horses by a tune if he wants to get into all that.
We are fine now, got windows on thier tracks and re-glued, got window up/down switch socket replaced, cleaned out interior of doors down in the seam, got rear shocks on, oil and coolant changed, got center console lid changed out, chopped off tail pipes after the axle hump to pound exhaust directly to the ground.
seems like all is well. from what i am reading here, seems like we dont really know if "all is well" in reality until he looks at the tables / tune. we are doing about 13deg of timing right now,, not sure if we should or would want to do any more.
we need to adapt the KN conical filter "straight" to the maf, right now using the stock airbox with square filter. this may happen today.
later today we are finally getting my cougar running from last Christmas deer hit.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: jcassity on August 18, 2017, 09:30:42 AM
these little buggers seem to be holding up really well, a tad tiny bit noisy but doing well. his motor has prob 60k on it by now since i built it.
summit said we could use 1.7's on an HO cam or even an E cam,, i wasnt too sure i wanted to agree with that not really knowing the valve float conditions i may find later. valve reliefs on our pistons are very generous though.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: jcassity on August 18, 2017, 09:38:07 AM
forgot to mention, had to home make some valve cover gaskets,, no one had those fancy ford explorer metal ones on hand so 3/16'' gasket material did wonders.
up in that post with the valve cover paint you can see the brand new replacement gasket slipping out. we demo'd the covers back out and traded in for hand made ones.
i keep telling mason not to use silicone on "both sides of the VC gasket,, he just needs to live and learn. i re-bevel the valve cover holes, then either not use silicone or i will silicone the gasket to the cover only.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: thunderjet302 on August 18, 2017, 10:01:03 AM
Quote from: flipnbird;462284
with the bend and the filter inside the fender well, like the pic you posted on the right.....
Jcassity leave the stock airbox and filter in place. The MAF you have works either with the stock airbox or a cold air intake. Do not clamp a conical filter to the end of the MAF. It is not designed to run that way.
Thanks for the clarification flipnbird!
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: thunderjet302 on August 18, 2017, 10:05:27 AM
That PP intake you are running is a knock off of the Edelbrock Performer RPM intake I have. You're really going to want at least 3.73 gears with it, especially with an AOD. With 3.73s and a non-lockup torque converter the engine in my car spins 2300rpm at 70 mph. With a lockup converter engine rpm at 70 mph will probably be a hundred or so rpm less.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: thunderjet302 on August 18, 2017, 10:10:17 AM
Quote from: TheFoeYouKnow;462271
C&L is a top shelf MAF. It's what I'm running. When I moved from a 30# stock airbox calibrated sample tube to a custom tune, I just called them and asked for the best sample tube for stock 19# injectors and the MAF transfer function table to use with it. They were most helpful. For me, the biggest problem in running a calibrated MAF was that I had GT40P heads, which have small chambers and strange burn characteristics, combined with KB domes. My compression ratio is 10.9:1 It might have been more friendly if I had better heads. Or even non-P GT40's.
I believe the combo plays a role in how well a calibrated MAF works without a tune. My engine has around 9.5:1 compression. So with 16° base timing and 93 octane fuel it's plenty in the "safe" zone.
That being said next year I'm buying an 80mm Pro-M MAF and having the car dyno tuned. I'm finally done screwing with this engine so I'm getting it dialed in.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: rotorr22 on August 18, 2017, 01:54:16 PM
Quote from: thunderjet302;462293
That PP intake you are running is a knock off of the Edelbrock Performer RPM intake I have. You're really going to want at least 3.73 gears with it, especially with an AOD. With 3.73s and a non-lockup torque converter the engine in my car spins 2300rpm at 70 mph. With a lockup converter engine rpm at 70 mph will probably be a hundred or so rpm less.
You make an excellent point regarding a car with overdrive. The SBF 5.0 is no torque monster in stock form. Typical modifications often shift both HP and torque higher up in the RPM range. Insufficient gearing can cause hunting between gears even at the hint of a grade or hill.
Ford did not seem to understand this back in the 80's & 90's or else they were trying to squeeze the last bit of MPG out of the fleet to meet government standards. I owned a 95 F150 5.0 4x4 EFI that was an absolute pig in OD with the stock (3.34 or close) rear end ratio. It would hunt between overdrive and third gear if the wind shifted. The truck needed 3.73's or 4.11's to drive properly. The fuel mileage was bad and on par with my 8.1L/Allison BBC in my 2500HD.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: Beau on August 18, 2017, 07:36:53 PM
Quote from: rotorr22;462296
The SBF 5.0 is no torque monster in stock form.
Actually, the HO is decent on torque, for the time and the technology of the day ('87-95), it's the rear gear and the transmission and it's less than stellar torque convertor that made stock AOD Stangs gutless pigs. Get one with a T5 and there was a good bt more "git up n' go".
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: rotorr22 on August 18, 2017, 10:18:48 PM
Quote from: ThunderbirdSport302;462299
Actually, the HO is decent on torque, for the time and the technology of the day ('87-95), it's the rear gear and the transmission and it's less than stellar torque convertor that made stock AOD Stangs gutless pigs. Get one with a T5 and there was a good bt more "git up n' go".
My stock 5.0/AOD's "git up and go" got up and went.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on August 20, 2017, 12:39:43 AM
Quote from: rotorr22;462301
My stock 5.0/AOD's "git up and go" got up and went.
That's because your stock 5.0 made less power, new, than my wife's 4 cylinder Fusion. I would dare to say that the stock non-HO 5.0 didn't come equipped with "git up and go".
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: Beau on August 20, 2017, 01:10:54 AM
Yeah, I think there's clearly some lack of understanding that there's HP/torque differences between the Tbird 5.0 and that of the Mustang. It's obvious that Scott, Mason, and Chance have at least HO engines with upgrades in their project cars, so throwing disinformation around is, well, unwarranted.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: jcassity on August 20, 2017, 09:48:40 PM
250 miles on mass air changes to the HO .030 over motor & PP lower / upper , 65mm TB with 24lb inj,,,,, results
no miss fuel economy went up which suprised us both., before he was hard pressed to see 20hwy & 17city
he just reported he got 26hwy
all is well ,, not sure now what to do with the mk8 maf,, i guess i will give it away.
yesterday and today we put backc together my 20th from a deer hit last christmas, i will update that thread later. all seems to be ok with the 20th as well.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: rotorr22 on August 20, 2017, 11:57:20 PM
Quote from: ThunderbirdSport302;462316
Yeah, I think there's clearly some lack of understanding that there's HP/torque differences between the Tbird 5.0 and that of the Mustang. It's obvious that Scott, Mason, and Chance have at least HO engines with upgrades in their project cars, so throwing disinformation around is, well, unwarranted.
I thought a lot about that comment and decided to take the high road.
This is my other "302" on the dyno at Medina Mountain Motors. Despite being clueless about 5.0's, I made 360 HP@ 6,000 RPM with a tiny hydraulic roller cam, 9.5:1 compression an early set of AFR 165 heads, a dual plane intake, a stock water pump, an alternator, a Summit 600 CFM carb and a set of very restrictive(small port) dyno headers that had to be used to clear the cradle. I left 10-15 more HP on the table that I could have picked up with timing and carb jetting, but dyno time is expensive. Those headers likely cost me another 10 HP. I happen to have a TFS 190 TW 11R headed 349 8.2 deck stroker going together in my shop. I threw in a pic of the heads sitting on my kitchen counter to show you I'm not blowing smoke.
I've owned and driven more 302's, including a 70 Boss 302 Mustang, than I care to think about in my 61 years standing upright (Ok, I might not have been upright that first year). I know why some ran OK as well as why some didn't. The light weight of the fox mustangs combined with the better cam and E7 heads on the HO made the car feel torquey, especially with a stick, but in fact, the engine was lucky to produce 320 LB/ft. That's not a torque monster. Decent, but not exceptional. My 306 Maverick produces over 380 Lb/Ft at the flywheel and I still don't consider that exceptional in any regard.
Lastly, don't confuse my dissatisfaction with my 86 Elan's 5.0/AOD's poochiness as a blanket condemnation of all SBF's. I understand 150 HP with maybe 110 at the rear wheels is not going to impress. It doesn't mean that I can't have a bit of fun saying so or that I don't understand how to make it far quicker.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: jcassity on August 21, 2017, 09:40:49 AM
nice heads there, are those 202's ? they look really big. something like that should have beehive springs instead,, whats the seat presure?
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: Beau on August 21, 2017, 01:34:39 PM
No, by today's standard, 400 ft/lb OR HP is pretty tame, especially when you can nearly get that in a honda civic.
By 1987's standard, 300ft/lb was pretty badass though, and Ford put a lot of Mustangs in people's driveways because of it.
But, I'll agree with ya....a 750 horse Mustang makes most all others seem like they're powered by a 15 horse Briggs. (not mine, belongs to a friend.)
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: thunderjet302 on August 21, 2017, 04:38:51 PM
Quote from: jcassity;462325
250 miles on mass air changes to the HO .030 over motor & PP lower / upper , 65mm TB with 24lb inj,,,,, results
no miss fuel economy went up which suprised us both., before he was hard pressed to see 20hwy & 17city
he just reported he got 26hwy
all is well ,, not sure now what to do with the mk8 maf,, i guess i will give it away.
yesterday and today we put backc together my 20th from a deer hit last christmas, i will update that thread later. all seems to be ok with the 20th as well.
Excellent to hear. I figured the calibrated MAF would solve your problem.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: thunderjet302 on August 21, 2017, 04:53:10 PM
Quote from: rotorr22;462296
You make an excellent point regarding a car with overdrive. The SBF 5.0 is no torque monster in stock form. Typical modifications often shift both HP and torque higher up in the RPM range. Insufficient gearing can cause hunting between gears even at the hint of a grade or hill.
Ford did not seem to understand this back in the 80's & 90's or else they were trying to squeeze the last bit of MPG out of the fleet to meet government standards. I owned a 95 F150 5.0 4x4 EFI that was an absolute pig in OD with the stock (3.34 or close) rear end ratio. It would hunt between overdrive and third gear if the wind shifted. The truck needed 3.73's or 4.11's to drive properly. The fuel mileage was bad and on par with my 8.1L/Allison BBC in my 2500HD.
The stock gearing selection in 80's 5.0 powered Fords is most definitely for fuel economy. You could order some 5.0HO/AOD cars (Mark VII) with 3.27s but it wasn't enough, especially since the AOD's first gear is 2.40:1
Once you get an engine that makes ok power (300+ hp) putting a decent stall converter and differential gear in can make the car feel more powerful than it is. Even OEMs are doing that now. My 17 Accord V6 makes 280hp and around 250ft/lbs torque. It has a decently high stall converter and higher gear ratio from the factory. It's enough to make the car feel powerful in most driving situations and still propel a 3600lb 4 door sedan to 60mph in around 6 seconds flat.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: thunderjet302 on August 21, 2017, 05:03:45 PM
Quote from: rotorr22;462329
I thought a lot about that comment and decided to take the high road.
This is my other "302" on the dyno at Medina Mountain Motors. Despite being clueless about 5.0's, I made 360 HP@ 6,000 RPM with a tiny hydraulic roller cam, 9.5:1 compression an early set of AFR 165 heads, a dual plane intake, a stock water pump, an alternator, a Summit 600 CFM carb and a set of very restrictive(small port) dyno headers that had to be used to clear the cradle. I left 10-15 more HP on the table that I could have picked up with timing and carb jetting, but dyno time is expensive. Those headers likely cost me another 10 HP. I happen to have a TFS 190 TW 11R headed 349 8.2 deck stroker going together in my shop. I threw in a pic of the heads sitting on my kitchen counter to show you I'm not blowing smoke.
I've owned and driven more 302's, including a 70 Boss 302 Mustang, than I care to think about in my 61 years standing upright (Ok, I might not have been upright that first year). I know why some ran OK as well as why some didn't. The light weight of the fox mustangs combined with the better cam and E7 heads on the HO made the car feel torquey, especially with a stick, but in fact, the engine was lucky to produce 320 LB/ft. That's not a torque monster. Decent, but not exceptional. My 306 Maverick produces over 380 Lb/Ft at the flywheel and I still don't consider that exceptional in any regard.
Lastly, don't confuse my dissatisfaction with my 86 Elan's 5.0/AOD's poochiness as a blanket condemnation of all SBF's. I understand 150 HP with maybe 110 at the rear wheels is not going to impress. It doesn't mean that I can't have a bit of fun saying so or that I don't understand how to make it far quicker.
My "money" (i.e. when I have a lot of extra of it) build is a N/A Dart 363 with TW 11R 205 heads, a TF R intake, and a cam to tie it all together. 500hp/500ft/lbs NA under a stock hood would be the goal. Need some cubes for torque.
I've driven several Coyote 5.0 Mustangs and never felt them lacking torque down low, as some people have felt. Then again I tend to rev engines more than most, even from a start. You don't feel that missing torque below 3000rpm if you're never below 3000rpm :hick:.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: jcassity on August 27, 2017, 09:29:52 AM
update,
after running around Charlottsville va for several days now sorta considered in town mix with some major high speed roads.. his trip minder and fuel gauge and actual fuel gallon calcs all match up showing an avg 24mpg.
very nice change from previous conditions. I was constantly telling mason that averaging 18mpg hwy & 16 city is totally wrong and our build here must have something wrong. makes me wonder about the combo / EEC we had before.
We were running a 86 Linc MK7 HO VL1 SD EEC we got from Tom back in 2008 along with an HO cam & 19lb inj. not sure why fuel consumption was so poor. He even has a trac lock 2.73 rear for better fuel on the hwy.
oh well, things look better for the wallet says mason, 25 or more % increase in mileage & a tiny bit more performance noticed seems to be worth the change to mass air.
if we had no fuel savings, then i would be saying whats the point.
I told mason he is on his own now with respect to tuning the EEC, yet in his words... "dad, i suffered a fuel use gain, and a little more performance gain, i start learning how to tweek the eec i might break something".
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: thunderjet302 on August 28, 2017, 04:40:43 PM
I'm a bit surprised at the MPG increase. It shouldn't have been that drastic. The only thing I can figure is that, even with a stock HO cam, the GT40 heads changed the vacuum characteristics of the engine so much that the SD system had a hard time compensating.
Some of the MPG increase can be attributed to the intake manifold as well. When I swapped from a GT40 intake to the Performer RPM the car gained 1-2 MPG city and highway, with no other changes. Something related to the engine having to work less to draw in air.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: Beau on August 28, 2017, 07:03:38 PM
Well, the GT40 heads are more efficient, and the Cobra/Explorer intakes flow more, with "smoother" and less restrictions than HO/SO intakes, so there ya have it.
It's common knowledge that doing a mass air swap alone on a stock HO will not only rob acceleration, but also cause a bit of power loss. It's usefulness comes with other upgrades (which obviously would require the mass air).
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: jcassity on August 30, 2017, 11:42:28 AM
we tossed the explorer upper & Lower for the PP style lower and upper. he's only a .030 over 302 block with whatever casting number HO cam & 24lb injectors. we ran an A9L eec on this aod setup,, worked fine,,,, seemed like the reman Mass Air EEC i got from vinnie years ago being an A9P equal made the car feel a tad better so we have that installed now.
we feared some sorta o2 sensor conflict when hooking up to an A9L from warnings others post in the stangs. Thinking wiring of stang vs birds & cougs are just a bit different that the 02 sensor issue doesnt exist for our cars. ...just an assumption on my part.
we suspected his converter isnt stock either, car feels like it hit gears more agressively when it was stock than the identical aod in my 20th. Scott Banner the previous owner and prior member here "Privateer" said the same thing. i couldnt make heads or tails of the converter when i had it out. Privateer said he thought he remembered the trans got some work done to it with valve bodies or something.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: thunderjet302 on August 30, 2017, 05:01:29 PM
A9L *should* have had an issue, due to the Thundercat O2 wiring. If it's an 87 car there may have been a wiring difference that doesn't cause an issue but I can't say for sure.
I know that the 88 cars will burn the trace in an A9L with the stock wiring. 87 I'm not sure.
Either way the A9L/A9P doesn't really care if a stick or auto is behind the engine.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on August 30, 2017, 06:54:38 PM
I've got an A9P with all the matching wiring running an A9L based tune. The EEC doesn't seem to care.
Title: Mass Air added, hesitation off the line
Post by: thunderjet302 on August 31, 2017, 03:12:24 PM
Quote from: TheFoeYouKnow;462453
I've got an A9P with all the matching wiring running an A9L based tune. The EEC doesn't seem to care.
IIRC the only big difference between the tunes was the A9P has a bit more timing down low to get the car going with the AOD.