needturbo6

^^^ using fuel only comp

i have been thinkin about this 4 a while and am pretty sure it would work,

basically using a fuel only comp. so u get complete control over the fuel injection and leave the EEC to control ignition - this would prob be of best use in a boosted car, but i would guess NA cars could also benifit slightly

THE IDEA
use resitors connected in place of the injectors for the EEC, so it thinks they are still connected.
and
hook up a fuel-only computer - i dont know if the std sensors can be used by the fuel only computer aswell or a second set might have to be installed

benifits:
bigger injectors can be used
all the other features in that are incorporated into the std comp can be used - air con, trip comp, auto tranny,etc.
no need to setup igniton maps
a MAF could be used

would this work? though its much like using resistors "in place" of tranny solenoids so i cant see why not?

anyone wanna give it a go?
and does anyone know the cost of a new fuel-only comp?
any other opinions?

INJECTED250

the fuel only computer will have its own map sensor and stuff, i like the idea im running an inject fuel only ecu on my 250 in my corty, ive thought about piggy backing the falcons ecu using youre idea... i dont think it would even matter if the ecu didnt detect injectors ther

__________________
EB FALCON
98 T5 gear box (was auto)
Wade 977b cam
3.7 lsd
AU bottem end
ELXR6 ported Head
PH4480 Pacemakers

EDXR8

If you were using in with forced induction you will also want to alter ignition curves. On NA engines there would be little gain IMO because the standard EEC is usually enough for most modded I6's.

needturbo6

personally i think the stock igniton maps would be ok up until ~15psi, my assumption is that car manufacturers spend a lot of money on gettin the tune "right" (esp. ford) and tend to tune the cars to run on some of the poorest fuel around, hence igniton advance is kept in the right range for most boosted motors,
the only reason i would think igntion maps would need to be modified would be in the case of leaning out, high intake charge temp and high boost, all which can cause detonation

although u could extract a bit more power with altering the igniton curves, i wouldnt think it'd be absolutly nessecary....it might keep costs down goin this way....

EDXR8

I don't know what the I6 timing maps are like but on the V8 I have to pull out a fair bit of timing running 10psi boost. Nearly everyone I talk to say the I6 and V8's can handle around 6psi without EEC modifications but I can't see you running 15psi, could be wrong though.

With forced induction it really isn't worth doing cheap fixes. The engines were designed for NA and even with the safe ford settings you are just asking for trouble.

You could always run the stand alone fuel computer and then a boost retard ignition system but even then you would have to be getting close to an basic aftermarket EEC like the EMS stinger.

needturbo6

yeh thats what im starting to think, the cost, if a fuel-only comp. could be picked up at a good price, sometimes they come up on e-bay, it might be a good alternative.

the only reason i would do this would be so the ecu could be left to control other functions such as auto tranny, air con. etc

would basic ECU's like the stinger be able to control an auto trans? etc

EDXR8

You still run the factory EEC in conjunction with the stinger. The Stinger just controlls ignition and fuel maps, trans and other general functions are still controlled by the factory EEC. The more expensive EMS 8860 can contol everyting including trans. The stinger is around $1700 fully tuned while the 8860 is around $2300 tuned.

MLS

Sounds like your idea is just to make the fuel map adjustable, yes?

If so, why not just get an AFC, splice it in to the MAF wiring and adjust away?

If there are other reasons for doing trying to get a fuel only ECU you might have to explain further.

The other thing to bear in mind is that both the existing ECU and new fuel only ECU will need to be connected to all the relative sensors, to do this properly you would need to fit inline diodes into each of the wires to prevent possible false reading caused by backfeed from either of the ECU's. This in itself could work out to be fairly costly.

You can get a Wolf 3D supplied, fitted and tuned for around $3k, in my opinion that would be the better way to go. Doing this will also allow you to get rid of the MAF and just use the signals from the TPS and MAP instead, therefore less intake restriction, more power.

needturbo6

thats why i think it would be a better idea for the 4L OHC, i thought since it uses a MAP, an AFC cannot be used?

i did say in my first post a second set of sensors might have to be used.
but sensors can costly too

im led to beleive MAF's can be good in some situations, as they adjust for air volume more readily, but the use of another MAP might be the better way... was just a thought

im not intending to do this soon, unless i can pick up a fuel-only computer at the right price. thanx for the responses so far, keep em coming

MLS

Have look at page 47 on this PDF, they show that you can connect to either a MAF, Air Flow sensor or a MAP (pressure sensor)