• Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech

Carb to EFI swap; how much gain in numbers could I expect?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jerry S
  • Start date Start date Sep 18, 2004

jerry S

New Member
Sep 3, 2003
1,365
1
0
52.22N 5.12E
Sep 18, 2004
#1
  • Sep 18, 2004
  • #1
My engine is fresh, with 50 miles on it. Its top dyno run was 351 hp/331 ft/lbs torque at the wheels. Torque is MUCH higher at lower rpms. Assuming 20% drive train loss from my C-6 (could be as high as 30% according to some), this means my peak hp 438 at the fly. I have a Holly 650 double pumper on it now. I was looking at the Edelbrock web site for the multiport EFI system and they speak of 126 hp gain and 120 ft/lbs torque gain on a 302 from swapping the carb for the EFI system with no other mods. Would I expect to see similar gains on my 351W or is their claim just advertising puffery?

jS
 

Route666

Active Member
Aug 16, 2003
1,652
6
39
Brisbane, Australia
Sep 18, 2004
#2
  • Sep 18, 2004
  • #2
Holy crap! I'd like to know if gains like that are possible too!

The swap Edelbrock did most likely involved a small and/or untuned carb, a new (better) manifold, and the injection equipment. Do you have a link to it?
 

allcarfan

The Answer Man
Founding Member
Apr 8, 2001
2,458
1
56
North Atlanta
Sep 18, 2004
#3
  • Sep 18, 2004
  • #3
I seriously doubt you will gain any significatn hp by swapping to EFI....unless your engine is completely untuned
 

BlueMonster65

Founding Member
Feb 24, 2001
385
0
16
Connecticut
Sep 18, 2004
#4
  • Sep 18, 2004
  • #4
i agree with allcarfan.
usually with efi more torque is developed at low rpm and less top end hp.
for all out hp a carb is the way to go. however that is not always true some efi sys. that allow independent cly. tuning can be better than any carb setup.
 

jerry S

New Member
Sep 3, 2003
1,365
1
0
52.22N 5.12E
Sep 18, 2004
#5
  • Sep 18, 2004
  • #5
Route666 said:
Holy crap! I'd like to know if gains like that are possible too!

The swap Edelbrock did most likely involved a small and/or untuned carb, a new (better) manifold, and the injection equipment. Do you have a link to it?
Click to expand...

You are right. What I failed to notice when I skimmed the reading was that they also added new cyl. heads and a new cam. When I rebuilt my stock 351W, I too added Performer RPM cyl. heads and a new cam and these two mods probably account for most of my hp gains.

http://www.edelbrock.com/automotive/index.html

If it sounds too good to be true.....
 

88 Fox GT

Active Member
Nov 18, 2002
1,674
0
36
Iowa
Sep 18, 2004
#6
  • Sep 18, 2004
  • #6
You will gain a good amount. Just think of it. Precise fuel metering ALL the time. The fuel injectors also atomize the fuel better, just a big sray of mist into each cylinder. I don't think you will see 100hp more or anything, but you will get some.
 
6

65mistress

Member
Aug 17, 2004
405
1
17
Generica USA
Sep 18, 2004
#7
  • Sep 18, 2004
  • #7
Not to mention, if you get one of the aftermarket kits from places like TwEECer, you may be able to pull even more power out of your engine. In some cases 80-100 hp.
 

allcarfan

The Answer Man
Founding Member
Apr 8, 2001
2,458
1
56
North Atlanta
Sep 18, 2004
#8
  • Sep 18, 2004
  • #8
the day a company makes a 100% bolt on EFI system that will give me 100hp more than what I have...I will be the first in line to buy it.
 

Route666

Active Member
Aug 16, 2003
1,652
6
39
Brisbane, Australia
Sep 19, 2004
#9
  • Sep 19, 2004
  • #9
Yeh I don't think you could ever have a fuel injection kit that increases maximum horsepower over a carbed motor by a large amount. If you tune for max power with a carb, it's going to be pretty efficient at max power because of intake air speed/turbulence mixing the mixture well. I think what FI will offer you over carb is better mileage and driveability while maintaining the power, and even gaining some over the whole rpm range. In general anyway.
 

6Stang7

New Member
Jun 1, 2003
1,470
0
0
Livermore, CA
Sep 19, 2004
#10
  • Sep 19, 2004
  • #10
Hp will go up, but not by that much. Torque increases by about 25%.
 

allcarfan

The Answer Man
Founding Member
Apr 8, 2001
2,458
1
56
North Atlanta
Sep 19, 2004
#11
  • Sep 19, 2004
  • #11
so if i make 400ftlbs of peak torque, you are saying i would get 100ftlbs more torque converting to EFI??
 
U

usedtobe 67p51d

New Member
Jul 8, 2003
208
0
0
let's tear up golfcourses and build race tracks!
Sep 19, 2004
#12
  • Sep 19, 2004
  • #12
Hotrod mag did a test about three or so years ago The carbed motor made 2-3 more hp but wasn't as smooth on delivery. it was a full tilt race carb
 

Hack

15 Year Member
Mar 23, 2004
1,945
13
69
Minneapolis
Sep 19, 2004
#13
  • Sep 19, 2004
  • #13
I don't think you should expect a hp or torque increase. But you should expect easier cold and hot starts, if you run a radical cam it will seem more tame, you won't have to tear the system apart and adjust it, fuel economy will improve,
 

Route666

Active Member
Aug 16, 2003
1,652
6
39
Brisbane, Australia
Sep 19, 2004
#14
  • Sep 19, 2004
  • #14
allcarfan said:
so if i make 400ftlbs of peak torque, you are saying i would get 100ftlbs more torque converting to EFI??
Click to expand...

I think maybe he meant you'd get 25% more area under the torque curve. An overall 25% increase. That sounds more reasonable.
 

6Stang7

New Member
Jun 1, 2003
1,470
0
0
Livermore, CA
Sep 20, 2004
#15
  • Sep 20, 2004
  • #15
Route666 said:
I think maybe he meant you'd get 25% more area under the torque curve. An overall 25% increase. That sounds more reasonable.
Click to expand...
That's part of it. It's also like the saying that manual drivelines lose 15% hp through them. If you have the same driveline, but increase the hp on the motor by 50hp, why should you lose more power through the same driveline? It only requires X amount of force to move it. The 25% is what you can expect on a normal motor. Of course you won't see 100 ft/lbs of torque on a 400 ft/lbs torque motor. EFI will also give you smoother acceleration, faster whined ups, and you will see an increase in gas mileage by about 10%-15%.
 

jerry S

New Member
Sep 3, 2003
1,365
1
0
52.22N 5.12E
Sep 20, 2004
#16
  • Sep 20, 2004
  • #16
thanks everybody for the input so far

6Stang7 said:
EFI will also give you smoother acceleration, faster whined ups, and you will see an increase in gas mileage by about 10%-15%.
Click to expand...

Aside from the better fuel economy, would I notice any real performance gains, like a drop in my 0-60 mph time by .2 of a second or something like that?
 

Route666

Active Member
Aug 16, 2003
1,652
6
39
Brisbane, Australia
Sep 20, 2004
#17
  • Sep 20, 2004
  • #17
6Stang7 said:
That's part of it. It's also like the saying that manual drivelines lose 15% hp through them. If you have the same driveline, but increase the hp on the motor by 50hp, why should you lose more power through the same driveline? It only requires X amount of force to move it. The 25% is what you can expect on a normal motor. Of course you won't see 100 ft/lbs of torque on a 400 ft/lbs torque motor. EFI will also give you smoother acceleration, faster whined ups, and you will see an increase in gas mileage by about 10%-15%.
Click to expand...

You should lose more with more power IF you make more power at higher rpms, as gears and driveshaft will be rotating more, and so more gear teeth meshing interactions, and more rotational inertia. I do see your point though, a gearbox will only take a certain amount of power to run at a certain speed, regardless of the power being put into it (to a reasonable extent, too much power may bend and heat things, requiring more power, but is the extreme case).

I by no means meant that the torque gain was the only thing. So you did actually mean 25% max torque gain is possible with say a starting 302 with 200 ft-lbs or so? I can't really see 25%, maybe 20%, but then again, stranger things have happened. What I suppose I'm saying is, I can't really see a carb being 20% less efficient (at mixing/atomising fuel) than a similar power EFI. (EFI 25% more eff. than carb = carb 20% less eff. than carb right?)

Is the consensus that you will definitely gain performance, driveability and fuel economy with a properly tuned EFI setup over a carb setup of the same magnitude? I believe this, it is easy to see why, it is all worked out, no set compromise tune, just measure everything on the fly and give as much fuel as is needed from a high-pressure nozzle.

anyways, enough of my yammering.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Not sure I believe the number
  • Gunny87
  • Feb 3, 2019
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
15
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Feb 6, 2019
FastDriver
  • Locked
“Doing stuff the wrong way for the right reasons”: A related stupid story.
  • CarMichael Angelo
  • Apr 26, 2020
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
7
Views
4K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Apr 27, 2020
a91what
Progress Thread HeHateMe gets bent
  • droopie85gt
  • Mar 31, 2018
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 45 46 47
Replies
922
Views
146K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 20, 2024
droopie85gt
B
Help Build A 302 For A Sand Rail Using Left Over Parts...
  • BallzDeep38
  • Apr 30, 2014
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
6
Views
5K
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- May 3, 2014
RacerJames
9
94 Gt Issues After Clutch Swap
  • 94StangerBanger
  • Sep 13, 2013
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
741
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Sep 14, 2013
94StangerBanger
9
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?