Norm Peterson

On the 1966 Mustang that was/is my daughter's car, I did retrofit carburetion to a throttle-bodied EFI 5.0 motor that was swapped in due to death of the original 289. This was just about 13 years ago now, so I don't remember all of the details other than it took two adapters to fit the small 4-barrel carb I had laying around up to what was essentially the same old 2-barrel manifold.

You'll still have the roller cam, and that's a really good thing these days. Commonly available automotive oils no longer contain as much extreme pressure additives (for environmental reasons), and lifter/lobe life on flat tappet cams has become somewhat problematic. Especially with bigger cams and stiffer valve springs.

Norm

venpry

I had the carb vs. EFI conversation with the owner of the shop I use for mechanical work. The way he explained it to me is that most carb setups have the potential to make more power than en equally equipped EFI setup. However, you have to make sacrifices in MPG and probably low end drivability in the carb equipped motor to get there. He did say that there are EFI systems that can outperform carbs if tuned properly, like the weber multi tb setup below:



The cool thing with the Webber setup is that with the right air filter/cleaner (like an oval Cobra style), you'd have to look pretty closely to be able to tell that it was EFI. The bummer is that it can't be run with a Ford EEC IV ECU.

Anyway, this is why late model BMW M's, whichproduce 100hp per liter or better,are setup with one TB per cylinder.

Colorado_Mustang

If you like to tinker with carbs and don't mind the extra work, go carb'd.

However, if you want hands off reliability and/or a DD type engine, go FI.

Personally, if I had an engine that already had FI on it and had a programmable computer to control it, I would keep it.

Soaring

As I obviously do with my 03 Mach, but I can't work on that engine. And the pleasure of owning a classic is to be able to do all the work on it. Obviously, the new Ford engines are manufactured to modern standards that our old engines cannot hopefully compete with, but the the reliability thing has me bugged. I don't rely more on the Mach anymore than the 65.
That's scary, huh?
I'm just wondering how many of you guys who have the FI engines have the correct tool to diagnose your engine and components, and how in hell did you install that device. I also want to remind you knuckleheads that you are on the classic mustang forum, so this discussion about modern Mustangs is slightly out of context. But, since some of you have fuel injected engines in your early Mustangs, it is allowed to continue for discussion.

JMD

No flame taken, I have owned lots of fuel injectedvehicles, and I still own fuel injected vehicles, I have even built a performance vehicle with EFI, although it now has a carburator. I just prefer carbs on my project cars. If I feel the need to drive a computer controlledvehicle I have plenty of em. I can buy plenty of these new off the lot for as long as my budget allows, you see, to me, especialy after doing an EFI project, I really don't want all the "civility" of a computer controlled car as a project.

Concerning your above statement, I have to disagree, computer controled vehicles and carbed vehicles have hardly any "identical procedures" when it comes to fixing a problem and tuning. Excluding mechanical failure of an engine, I can't think of an issue that I would not be able to diagnose and repair on the roadside (with a parts store within reach) when a non-computer car stops running, this aint the case on a comp car. (ie: fuel, timing, ignition). You know, it just sucks when a personHAS to call a tow truck when he can not figure out why his computer controled can is not getting fuel or spark,,,,,this is bad, but what is worse is an intermitant problem,, that dosent throw the right codes,,,,

In any case I was just presenting you with my opinion, which is still the same. I think that fuel injection is great, on the right vehicles.

Norm Peterson

Much appreciated. I guess it puts some of us off more in the Pro-Touring direction of classic car tinkering(I realize that the "Pro-Touring" handle seems to have a bit more "traction" with the various GM products, but anyway). The best of the "old" combined with (arguably) the best of the new technology.

I do understand the difficulty in working on newer vehicles, but scan tools are available at what I consider to be reasonable prices, and some aren't much bigger than a hand-held calculator. Actron has a pretty good line, and I figure that buying a 9145 through Pep Boys paid for itself the first time I used it (around here, an hour of diag time plus an hour of R&R labor is a wash against a $200 scan tool, and you have to buy the part anyway).

Aftermarket EFI does mostly put you on your own (and forces you to think), although sensor testers are available to help. The 'having to think' part, however,isn't all that different from what I had to do many years ago to track down why a 1950's-era car that belonged to my parents that I was then allowed to drive would cut out in left turns but not in rights.

Guess I ought to leave any further semi-off-topic thoughts as thoughts only right about here. . .


Norm