what is the differance between the t/c and 5.0/3.8 tank.
i am sorting thru fuel starvation problems with my t/c tank
all help will be apperciated:D
AFAIK, all 1987-88 tanks regardless of engine size are 22.1 gallons. There is a thread here that may help you more:
http://natomessageboard.com/Forum1/HTML/015393.html
hmm then why do t/c have fuel issues and 3.8/5.0 doesnt.
this is what i am trying to get to the bottom of.
even my converted car the 429t/c still has fuel issues at 1/2 tank
were i can run my driver 5.0 down to 2 gallons and not have starvation problems?
The tanks (5.0 & 2.3) I've seen are identical, you wimp ass 5.0 just ain't got enough power to push the fuel into the back of the tank...
When you do a hard right turn in a TCat speed, the fuel pump can't pick up fuel when you have less than half a tank. Most of the TC owners just keep it at a full tank to solve the problem. It really is strange....it may be the pickup tube, or the fact that the TC used higher-flow injectors, therefore is needing more fuel...who knows. Isn't there a fuel pulse dampener inline too? If you've bypassed all that stuff then you could probably just use a 3.8/5.0 tank and pickup, and reuse your fuel pump if it's still good. I am not sure if you can use a V6/V8 pickup with the 4-banger tank.
it has the stock tank,modifyd pickup with dual 1/2 pickups 1/8 off bottom of tank
1/2 fuel line to holley blue pump 1/2 line to regulator 1/2 to n20 selonoid and 3/8 to carb.
this is all an issue with my 429- c/6 converted t/c.
dunno, it runs good for what it is:D .
but seriously i need to figure out what is wrong
http://www.foxtbirdcougarforums.com/showthread.php?t=4624&page=2
heres a description of my problem
Uhhh...when I'm driving my TC I always run it down to 1/4 tank or less before filling up, and I've NEVER had issues with fuel starvation. And we have some windy roads around here.
bump for possibly some more help or knowledge
I can tell you that according to the Ford/Mercury brochures, I'm almost positive it lists the Turbo-model cars as having smaller tanks than V6/V8 models. Eighteen gallons comes to mind for Turbo XR7's and TC's. I even think there's a difference in an auto TC and a manual TC. I had studied all this stuff back when I had an '88 TC and it's just kinda coming back to me. I think the manual TC had the smallest tank, which in my mind I attributed to the manual having dual exhaust, which left less room under the tail end for a tank. To check myself, I got out a couple brochures. The '84 Cougar brochure says, "21.0 gallons for non-Turbo cars, 18.0 for Turbo (XR7) cars". The '86 Cougar brochure says, "20.6 gallons for non-Turbo cars, 18.2 gallons for Turbo (XR7) cars". I guess in '84 they tended to round off. I also remember references to 22 gallons. Seems like there might have been 3 tank sizes. Eric, I thought there was a section on this info on your site, which is where I seem to remember seeing some of it. I don't know if this has anything to do with your problem. Maybe you've got a car that came with a smaller tank and it's been replaced with a bigger one?? Good luck!
Fordman3
The 1987-88 TC's definitely had 22-gallon tanks, not 18 as with previous models. Even the brochures for those cars were incorrect. Trust me, I've been following the situation on the NATO board and those guys know their stuff...no way I'm going to argue with them! LOL! It just seems like the sumps are different for some reason. Honestly I don't know what's up, just that there is a problem and the only real sure way to fix it is with a fuel cell. I'd love to also know why this happens.
Sleeper--what do you have as far as a fuel filter? Stock?
it has 1/2 fuel line from the tank to pump 1/2 from pump to filter filter to regulator is 1/2 and to carb is 3/8 and to the n2o selonoid is 1/2
pump-- aeromotive billet 140 gph (previous holley blue) both were at 8 psi
filter-- edelbrock "new" (previous F.I screen style)
regulator -- holley
ive changed the parts above and it seemed to fix the issue but havent got to put about 1 mile on it since i done the work
according to the 88 owners manual, it says 22.1 gallons, it also says that its recomended to change the fuel filter every oil change
the only thing i can think of is that the hanger might be different, i havnt dropped the tank in my 3.8 bird as of yet so i cant compair the two
the fuel pulse dampener on the 2.3L cars is on the fuel rail
think it is fixed now time will tell for sure
Cool, keep us updated. *crosses fingers* ;)
It
"said" that?! You have a
talking owner's manual? That's gotta be a rare option bro, hang onto that big time! What else does it "say"? :flip:
It makes up for the talking 83's...Ford could never keep their mouths shut.
Here is what I seriously think the problem is: Your fuel vent line opening is too small for the fuel demands of the 429. Leave the gas cap off, and drive it around like that for a short time, and see if the problem persists. I had a customer build a serious 408 mustang using the stock tank, with a giant fuel pump, line, etc...and he partially collapsed the tank due to vacuum....
you got it. have to take the gas cap off. I will be adding a 3/8 vent here in the next few weeks.
for now car is fixed just not drivable cause i have the motor torn down.
Go with a 1/2", if you can.....that's my suggestion.
Since I have appeared to fix your problem ( we shall see, lol), I want to see gratuitous images of your 429 car, got it?
found it a few weeks ago when i switched to another larger fuel pump.
pics are over in user rides under my name:D
In SLEEPER T-BIRD 87's case, his 140 GPH pump equates to 18.7 ft^3/hr (.312 ft^2/min). The vent tube is more than adequate to move that amount of air.
The stock unit? Or the 3/8th's vent line as proposed?
The stock unit.
If my math is right, you only need a teeny-tiny vent line even with a very powerful engine (lots of fuel being used per unit time).
I ran for two years (ignorance was bliss) with my vent line capped. The only result was a large sucking sound every time I opened the gas cap to fill up. Running your tank in a vacuum won't affect anything until your fuel pump can no longer overcome the increased pressure ratio required because of the vacuum.
Not to give math the appearance of not applying in "real-world" situations, but the vehicle I gave for an example was using a stock 3.8 mustang tank, and collapsed it due to the vent line not being large enough for the fuel demands of a 408. In addition, I have ran across other vehicles that have had vent line issues, guys beefing everything else up, but ignoring simple "math", where fluid going out of a sealed box must be displaced by something else, such as air, or another fluid....guys running into unexplainable stumbling problems in the top end or even mid track. Go ahead and run the stock line, if you feel the "math" lets you do so. I am simply stating that running an engine that has three times the fuel demands of the original engine might need some vent line mods...and am bringing up personal history on the topic...
Yeah, math or not...I'll defer to experience.