Ford Forums banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Australian Member
Joined
·
43 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi everybody, I was just wondering, what is TBI, as opposed to PFI?

All I know is that the 3.9 PFI is 139kw, and the TBI is 120kw, so obviously the PFI is the one to go for. :)

So, how do I tell the difference? Bare in mind I don't know a great deal about the innards of a car, so I won't recognise various mecahnical components on sight. I'm guessing, and it's only a guess, that the PFI is the one with the 3.9 Mulitpoint injection badge, but, if that's correct, is their any other way to know?

P.S. I'm basically looking at an EA now because my XC 302 plans fell through, thanks to a friend of mine's brother getting that exact car with the exact plans I had for it. I have this thing about originality.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,023 Posts
Umm, you are in no way better off with an XF, maybe back in 1988 this was the case but not 13 years later. If youve ever driven both youd never want to go back to an XF, and reliability wise an EA isnt any worse than any other car of similar age, condition and Kms. I owned an EA for 40,000kms+ and it never once not get me home, of course It did have a Headgasket replacement (which was caused by a 40C day and a blocked radiator tank) but other than that it never really gave me much trouble.

But like with any car avoid high kms and if possible get a manual, the performance difference is huge compared with the Auto
(both the 3 and 4 speed).

The best way to tell both engines apart is that the Single/Centre point (lower spec engine) has a large black tennis racket shaped intake on the passanger side of the motor.

The Multi Point has a black box in the front passenger corner, right behind the headlight and six highly visable silver 'tubes' bending downwards from the passanger side of the motor.

Id ignore whatever the badge says on the front 1/4 panel....
 

·
Australian Ford Member
Joined
·
1,120 Posts
Martin said:
Umm, you are in no way better off with an XF, maybe back in 1988 this was the case but not 13 years later. If youve ever driven both youd never want to go back to an XF, and reliability wise an EA isnt any worse than any other car of similar age, condition and Kms. I owned an EA for 40,000kms+ and it never once not get me home, of course It did have a Headgasket replacement (which was caused by a 40C day and a blocked radiator tank) but other than that it never really gave me much trouble.

But like with any car avoid high kms and if possible get a manual, the performance difference is huge compared with the Auto
(both the 3 and 4 speed).

The best way to tell both engines apart is that the Single/Centre point (lower spec engine) has a large black tennis racket shaped intake on the passanger side of the motor.

The Multi Point has a black box in the front passenger corner, right behind the headlight and six highly visable silver 'tubes' bending downwards from the passanger side of the motor.

Id ignore whatever the badge says on the front 1/4 panel....
Spot on.

I've had both XF 4.1 4sp man and EA 3.9 mpi (what Gruntly is calling PFI) 5sp man and there is no comparison.

Any EA that's still around in very good condition has most probably either had its main problems sorted out or it didn't have any to begin with.

Head problems weren't exactly unknown in XF's either.

Gruntly, the mpi (multi-point electronic fuel injection) was distinct from CFI (central fuel injection) which is also known as the TBI (throttle body injection) you mentioned which was single point fuel injection, pretty much like a carburettor supplying all cylinders but with the fuel flow controlled electronically. The mpi has a fuel supply to each cylinder by six injectors which are independently controlled by the ECU (computer). The mpi air intake box (the square black one Martin mentioned) also has EEC IV on it, which is used only on mpi versions.

The engine capacity is cast on the head on the right front (your left as you look at it standing in front of the car). There were 3.2 motors but they weren't injected. If it is 4.0 it is a later head and that means it's been replaced, or the whole engine has been replaced, so it's newer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,023 Posts
All 3 engines in the EA were controlled by EECIV...
 

·
T5 Expert Operator
Joined
·
6,540 Posts
Yeah i can vouch on this topic and say that the Mpi light years in acceleration. Apart from the 19kw difference it's the throttle response that sets them apart.

Once going the Tbi isn't too bad like on a hill it will keep up the speed and pull like a train, but acceleration of the lights is well ahhh abit pedetrian for my liking. (No offense to TBi falcon owners).
 

·
Australian Member
Joined
·
43 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Thanks gents, I'll be printing this out as a guide later on.

Fairlane Boy: I've been weighing up the pros and cons for a while, and basically, an EA seems the way to go. It's got most of the features of an EB, as well as the nice styling and the comfy interior. In my opinion EA-ED interior might not have been very interesting to look at, but it was the nicest to sit in, the complete oposite of the AU which looks great, but those seats! The only thing I dislike about the EA is also true to all the models either side of it, and that's that bloody handbrake, I can't stand it.

Basically, I can't afford an EB (scraping it for an EA honestly) and I don't know, I've never thought much of XFs. They haven't got character. Plus they're the size of a boat, which is my gripe with the XD and XE also, although i wouldn't pass up a 302 XE ESP if offered. :)

Martin: I agree completely about ignoring what's on the badge.

EA S: I had no idea there was a 3.2 EA, geez, it must have been pretty awful. Friend of mine had the 3.3 XE, and it's still hands down the worst Ford I have ever been in.

EF_Falcon_GuY: You're absolutely right about acceleration in the TBI, my father had one and planting the foot suceeded in making a lot of noise but not much else. :)
 

·
Australian BA XR6 Falcon
Joined
·
1,249 Posts
EA S said:


Spot on.

Gruntly, the mpi (multi-point electronic fuel injection) was distinct from CFI (central fuel injection) which is also known as the TBI (throttle body injection) you mentioned which was single point fuel injection, pretty much like a carburettor supplying all cylinders but with the fuel flow controlled electronically. The mpi has a fuel supply to each cylinder by six injectors which are independently controlled by the ECU (computer). The mpi air intake box (the square black one Martin mentioned) also has EEC IV on it, which is used only on mpi versions.

The engine capacity is cast on the head on the right front (your left as you look at it standing in front of the car). There were 3.2 motors but they weren't injected. If it is 4.0 it is a later head and that means it's been replaced, or the whole engine has been replaced, so it's newer.
To be 100% correct, the MPI injectors are 'gang fired' rather than individually controlled, iirc the EEC only has 2 outputs for the injectors which are fired in banks of 3.

The CFI setup was used on both the 3.2 and 3.9, 2 injectors sit in the top of the throttle body.

Kieron
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12 Posts
me ea s 5 speed is mpi , and the car drive beautifully ,it feels like new and has done 220k , never get an auto because they suck in comparison , everyone goes on about the ea being unreliable , there not bad , i beat my freinds vn ss with mine so you wont be complaining about the performance bye :wnc:
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top