• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech

Do I need 24# Injectors with these mods? - opinions please!!

  • Thread starter Thread starter 91LX_5L
  • Start date Start date Oct 22, 2004

91LX_5L

Founding Member
May 13, 2002
1,943
0
36
British Columbia
Oct 22, 2004
#1
  • Oct 22, 2004
  • #1
I want to complete my boltons with a MAF. Should I be looking at getting 24# injectors and a maf for them?

Im going to buy a maf which im getting for a fair price ($120) but its for my stock 19#s, which I think will really be fine but what do you guys think? Im not planning on adding a SC for a while (id say 2+ years down the road, and I wouldnt mind spending the money then for new injectors and maf).


Windsor Jr. Heads (iron, nothing too fancy)
Ford Motorsport e303 Cam
Ford SVO Cobra Intake
70mm BBK Throttle Body
Full exhaust + headers
CAI and some other goodies like gears etc

The maf I found is for my 94, its a Chrome PRO-M 75mm. So im not really sure if its worth finding a 24# set of injectors and a maf right now. I was just wanting a maf to complete my boltons.
 
W

wytstang

Mustang Master
Mar 14, 2004
4,988
4
78
Summerville,SC missing South Fl. weather :(
Oct 22, 2004
#2
  • Oct 22, 2004
  • #2
I think you should be fine with the 19lb injectors. Mabe just look into a fuel pressure regulator and add a bit more to help out.
 

SWYZ721

Member
Aug 24, 2004
208
0
16
Ann Arbor, MI
Oct 22, 2004
#3
  • Oct 22, 2004
  • #3
There should be some sort of calculation that can come close to telling us around what WHP that our injectors will be in a heavy duty cycle.
 

hawaiian

Founding Member
Feb 23, 2002
321
0
0
South Miami Fl
Oct 22, 2004
#4
  • Oct 22, 2004
  • #4
SWYZ721 said:
There should be some sort of calculation that can come close to telling us around what WHP that our injectors will be in a heavy duty cycle.
Click to expand...
Fuel Injectors:



Just as the wrong sized jets in a carb can cause decreased performance and driveability problems, so can incorrectly sized injectors. The following calculation can be used for approximating fuel flow per injector based on horsepower (HP) and Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (BSFC).

Note:

1) Engine HP must be a realistic estimate.

2) BSFC is determined from engine dyno measurements. It typically ranges from 0.4-0.6 for gasoline engines. A BSFC of 0.5 is a safe, initial estimate.


BSFC =
Pounds of fuel per hour

--------------------------
Brake Horse Power




3) The 0.8 multiplier for the "Number of Injectors" helps derive a practical "Max Injector Flow Rate" for each injector based on an effective real world injector operating pulse time and fuel flow. It is unrealistic to establish the fuel flow to an engine based on an injector operating pulse time of 100% (wide open all the time). This calculation uses an injector operating cycle of 80%. Some full race engine management systems may operate at 85-95% duty cycle, but extended operation may eventually overheat the injectors and cause irregular flow rates and poor low rpm operation.

Injector Flow Rate (lbs/hr) =
HP * BSFC

---------------------------
number of injectors * 0.8



With a known injector fuel flow rate you can get a rough estimate of the systems capacity by using:

HP =
IFR * number of injectors * 0.8

---------------------------------
BSFC


where
IFR = Injector Flow Rate (lbs/hr)


Increasing the fuel pressure can often provide increased fuel flow and better atomization. If you know an injector's static (non-pulsed) fuel flow at one system pressure you can find its static flow at another pressure with this:

F2 =

* F1
where
F2 is the calculated injector static flow (lbs/hr) at the higher pressure

P2 is the fuel system pressure (psi) you want to use

F1 is the injector's static flow (lbs/hr) at it's rated fuel system pressure (psi)

P1 is the fuel system pressure (psi) the injector is rated for





Taken from Pro-M website hope this helps also from another website i got 24lbh for 310 hp.
 

VibrantRedGT

"STANGNET'S PENGUIN SMACKER"
15 Year Member
Nov 29, 1999
14,679
424
154
Boca Raton, Florida
Oct 22, 2004
#5
  • Oct 22, 2004
  • #5
It would be a good time to upgrade. Since your upgrading the MAF then just buy it with a 24# calibration. My car ran lean with 19's (heads, cam, etc.). Just couldn't get it to run right until the 24# upgrade. Not saying that will happen to you but it happened to me.
 

ARed1995GT

New Member
Dec 9, 2003
401
0
0
Boca Raton, FL
Oct 22, 2004
#6
  • Oct 22, 2004
  • #6
im getting 24# injectors with my mods in my sig + the waiting to be installed mods, i dont think it should hurt or hinder my performance if the fuel pressure is adjusted right...
 

RIO5.0

15 Year Member
Feb 16, 2001
6,892
8
128
N.H.
Oct 22, 2004
#7
  • Oct 22, 2004
  • #7
you could prolly get by either way....i had the 24s in hand and decided to stay 19s...the thought being the AF ratio would show if the 19s weren't cutting it and showing up as being was lean...so I decided to go with that thought and follow it thru at the dyno..
wasn't the case...dyno showed me right where it needed to be...my last run was 262RWHP....AF stayed right in the sweet spot both pulls...
I swapped over to the 93 Cobra from a stock Tmoss lower..I was going to throw the 24s on for that dyno run...guess i'll never know what they would have given....
 

91LX_5L

Founding Member
May 13, 2002
1,943
0
36
British Columbia
Oct 23, 2004
#8
  • Oct 23, 2004
  • #8
yea so you think im fine for now, a used chrome maf and injectors will cost me way more then the $120 im paying...will it not?
 

RIO5.0

15 Year Member
Feb 16, 2001
6,892
8
128
N.H.
Oct 23, 2004
#9
  • Oct 23, 2004
  • #9
91LX_5L said:
yea so you think im fine for now, a used chrome maf and injectors will cost me way more then the $120 im paying...will it not?
Click to expand...

I have a Pro-M 77 on mine that is set for 19s, so it needed to go back for re-cal (115.00) and i had the 24s in hand...my thought was why do the swap if it wasnt really needed...I still run the stock EEC and didnt want no gremlims because of the swap, running 24s with a 19 EEC...
We have very close mods so are you ok with the 19s as its sits...my expierence says yes...mines been dyno run like 12 times, mostly for "whats it worth" info...My question was the same as yours last year...I pretty much followed the info from guys here and on the 5.0 tech side as to whether "upping" to 24s for my mods was needed...
I figured I'll step up to 24s when i add more sack to it...as its sits im 302FWHP and thats in the 19s comfort zone
 

91LX_5L

Founding Member
May 13, 2002
1,943
0
36
British Columbia
Oct 24, 2004
#10
  • Oct 24, 2004
  • #10
sweet thanks rio...ill wait till she gets blown!
 
V

VA302STANG

New Member
Oct 23, 1999
42
0
0
Stafford, Virginia
Oct 25, 2004
#11
  • Oct 25, 2004
  • #11
Could you not run 24 or 30 pound injectors on a stock motor if the calibration was correct?

Would 24 or 30 pound injectors not be running at a lower percentage?

I ask because I don't know, please help me out.

Based on my signature I would like to upgrade and I would like to buy injectors only once, even if I supercharge one day.

Thanks
 

gcomfx.com

Founding Member
Oct 22, 2002
3,690
0
56
Republic, MO
Oct 25, 2004
#12
  • Oct 25, 2004
  • #12
I'm running 24lbers and I still have to bump the fuel pressure to 43psi to keep it from detonating on the 125 shot.

My car runs rich all the time, but that's partly due to the fact I run 39psi of fuel pressure too.
If they were too big, wouldn't my CEL light be going nuts on stock fuel pressure settings???

Interesting question.... something I know little about.
 

final5-0

Mustang Master
Apr 6, 2003
6,817
12
79
DFW Texas
Oct 26, 2004
#13
  • Oct 26, 2004
  • #13
Using larger inj's can be done with the method of the maf falsely reporting air flow values to the pcm. It works up to a point and the larger the inj the more likely this method will not work so great. A more accurate method is to use real values in the pcm cal file as opposed to the cheat method.

The Cobra is a good example. It and the GT use the same maf and it is ok for two reasons. One of them is the Cobra or GT does not move enough air to max out the maf. The other reason is that Ford tells the Cobra pcm that 24lb inj's are being used. Take note here that Ford did not use the cheat method.

If you don't have a tuning device or chip then you have to rely on mechanical methods such as inj size, maf calibrations, afpr's and the like. Again, the larger the inj the more ineffective the mechanical methods become. You can only do so much by adjusting fuel pressure.

A good example is the power adder combos. How many times have you seen those guys dump the fmu's and move up to 42lb inj's AND tell the pcm about those big inj's with a chip or tuning device.

Our car's pcm (94 & 95) is load based where the fox cars are rpm based. When you lie to the pcm in our cars about airflow (calibrated mafs) you throw the load out of whack for all of the other tables that use load to get a reference point. The more the lie the more of a problem it can cause.

Why do you think most everybody uses 24lb inj's and ups the fuel pressure.

The two reasons are:
1. It works and you don't need a chip or tuner. A lot of people are doing it with no problems and that is a fact. Ever notice that some just don't seem to have as much luck as others with this method. See number 2.
2. When using a maf caled for 24lb inj's the load error in the pcm is not far enough out to cause a problem for some but it is for others.

After you move up to 30lb or larger inj's the drivability usually starts to suffer without making some pcm adjustments.

A couple of common complaints you hear of when using large inj's is over rich idle (read here surging, stalling, & such) and hot starts.

This is one reason that a custom tune will return the drivability and more power as well when larger inj's are used.

I've used 30lb inj's with the stock maf and a ProM 80mm maf which I now run with no problems but I have the ability to change inj values in the pcm with a Tweecer.

Just a few things I've seen with my car and by reading threads from guys with large inj's on the tuner and power adder sites.

Later
Grady
 

gcomfx.com

Founding Member
Oct 22, 2002
3,690
0
56
Republic, MO
Oct 26, 2004
#14
  • Oct 26, 2004
  • #14
Kewl man... thanks for the info. I guess if I focus on N/A performance I should probably start saving for a tweecer or chip.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Engine Unexplainable Exhaust Pop and Gurgle
  • Mrnissen122
  • Feb 14, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
12
Views
573
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Feb 18, 2026
Noobz347
S
Fuel ‘88 GT Runs Rich Cold — Fixes Itself When I Unplug Sensors (ECT, MAF, O2, etc.)
  • Sufarry
  • Nov 6, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
12
Views
855
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Nov 9, 2025
Mustang5L5
SN95 Desktop 363 Engine Combination - Looking for input
  • WhiteCobra95
  • Sep 8, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
11
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 6, 2025
Habu135
H
New kid on the block
  • HydraX
  • Mar 22, 2025
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
17
Views
760
The Welcome Wagon Mar 22, 2025
HydraX
H
H
Fox fuel pump upgrades
  • hawkinsdrag
  • Aug 17, 2023
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
27
Views
6K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Aug 19, 2023
Noobz347
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 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?