Would I benefit fron stepping down to 24 lb injectors?

raph130 said:

my first car, i was 17 yrs old, was a 13 second mitsubishi starion turbo, my 2nd car was a 1981 fully restored camaro z28 show car that had a full frame off restoration, brand new 350 crate motor, th350 transmission, and a built rear end packed with 3.73s and a locker, which rode on 295 tires on the rear and 265's on the front. after i sold that heavy chevy pos, ive owned 3 porsche 944's after that, a monte carlo 305 which i converted to a 350, a fiero gt, 4 mustangs actually i believe, a 4x4 truck, and a few other cars i can't remember at this moment.

Click to expand...

I'm proud of you...

5spd GT said:

I'm proud of you...

Click to expand...

i work like a bull dog on my mustangs whether it be day or all night long. i have people and cops that come by like crazy asking me questions and giving me the thumbs up or asking me to fix their mustang or some other car, and police asking me to work on their interceptors....your view on me is in the wrong place.

raph130 said:

i work like a bull dog on my mustangs whether it be day or all night long. i have people and cops that come by like crazy asking me questions and giving me the thumbs up or asking me to fix their mustang or some other car, and police asking me to work on their interceptors....your view on me is in the wrong place.

Click to expand...

I don't see how they could keep coming to you (again I don't believe it because of your numerous other lies outlined in this thread and others)...when the "advice" you give is wrong...

There are many more knowledable people than me on here like Rick, Michael, Hissin, etc...that have proven you wrong...but you refuse to believe it...again it sounds like you know what your doing...so have fun at it and don't kill to many people with your once posted 150mph plus runs...

you are so ignorant its funny. please by all means prove to everyone a warmer running engine creates more power. i have not seen any "proof", only ignorant people trying to act like they know the facts and arguing with at least 3 people that agree with me. i dont seem to be alone. thanks for the link because i didn't eeven notice those guys that were with me.

raph - the problem is that turning down the fuel pressure won't solve the problem. The computer is controlling the mixture based on the maf readings, and the O2 readings. It's simply gonna change the pulse width to get it back to where it's at now. Now, at the strip, there are folks that adjust the pressure, clear the computer - make a run, clear the computer, make a run, etc. It doesn't take long for the computer to adjust -- so on the street, pressure adjustments just don't accomplish much even though many people kid themselves into thinking they do.

Smell is no way to make judgements about mixture. Good that you've gotten it on a dyno with a wide band -that's the only way to determine you've got mixture issues. Then, if you truly have a mixture problem - the only way to solve it permanently is with a recalibrated maf (just because you've got the transfer function data doesn't mean it's calibrated correctly for your injector size/inlet piping configuration by the way), by loading the maf transfer function into the ecu via chip or tweecer, or by making changes to the appropriate ecu tables via chip or tweecer.

Dicking around with the fuel pressure on these cars is no way to permanently solve a/f ratio problems. It's pretty simple - that's just the way it is.

raph130 said:

according to my information tfs heads could have that problem not AFR. its a perfect bolt on. i have read alot about AFR heads before choosing. in fact fordmuscle.com has a very awesome article with pictures and dyno sheets showing a complete installation and engine power results on a stock 5.0

Click to expand...

And..... here's the proof you spout about. Read the PDF file.
http://www.trickflow.com/product/heads/twisted_wedge/pr_twiswedge.htm

The valves in TFS heads come no where as near to the top of a piston as do AFR heads. How do I know? I have them installed on my 86 with flat top pistons and <"NO"> flycutting. Do a little research before coming to regurgitate stuff you "heard" from your buddies. I'll let you in on another little secret as well. If.... IF Michael Yount or Rick or 5Spd do happen to be wrong about something.... they will catch it looooooooong before you ever will and will post the correction. To refer to 5spd as "ignorant" while you sit there and spout grade school, play ground, theory about what you "think" makes sense and everyone else should swallow, just shows the depth or your own ignorance. You would do much better to just admit what you don't know and learn from the things that these folks are trying to tell you. The whole "look at me, I know everything" routine doesn't wash in this forum.

It's the "Twisted" part of the TFS heads that usually gives them more p to v clearance. The 'twisted' combustion chamber positions the intake valve further on the down-hill side of the piston creating more room there. Of course it moves the exhaust valve a bit up-hill, but the intake is larger and usually has less clearance to begin with, not the exhaust valve. It's all about geometry....

raph - you don't seem to want to hear it from us; excerpt from Charles E. Probst book on Ford efi -- widely considered to be the bible on the Ford's efi systems. You've confused lower COOLANT temps with lower INTAKE AIR temps. From Probst --

"Some tuners recommend low-temperature thermostats. It's true that a cooler engine takes in cooler air - more pounds (mass) for more power. Sounds good, but lower coolant temperatures do not lower the temperature of intake air by the same amount.

There is one possible gain from a cooler thermostat: lowering head temperature may reduce probability of detonation. That means you can advance the spark timing for increased power. Except for the track, this is not one of your better ideas.

Most engines are designed to operate with a coolant temp of around 95C (200F). Unfortunately, lower coolant temperature will increase cylinder wall wear and, in cold climates, affect drivability. What's more, the cooling system operates with greater efficiency at the stock 200F degree temperature. So the lower-temperature thermostat could lead to overheating at high powers.

When I investigated this some time past, the Eveready engineers told me some NASCAR racers run 100% glycol in the cooling system so they can run the engine at higher temperatures. And in Europe, Honda found its racing engines operated more efficiently if they raised the air temperature. Something about lean-burn efficiency. How about that! Pass on cool thermostats."

That's what Mr. Probst has to say about cooler t'stats in the "Tuning for Performance...." section of his book. If you want to cool things down at the track - ice the intake. But pass on the 160F t'stat. 180 or 192 will work just fine.

raph130 said:

my friend didn't need the injectors at the time he got it. he got it because he is planning on twin turboing his stang this winter in the garage and putting down 600rwhp...all he has into the engine right now is a cam and maf and tb and 30lb injectors.

Click to expand...

you say he didn't get the injectors because he needed them now, but rather because he plans on putting down 600rwhp?

if in fact he is going to make that much power he would be stupid to run 30lb injectors. why do you think that vortech recommends 36-42s with their S-Trim/SQ-Trim blowers? they make alot less power than you are talking about. Don't get me wrong, I am not ragging, just trying to point out the obvious. It just doesn't sound like he has really planned his application very well. You guys realize you can use smaller injectors with n/a applications than with forced induction right?

Daggar said:

And..... here's the proof you spout about. Read the PDF file.
http://www.trickflow.com/product/heads/twisted_wedge/pr_twiswedge.htm

The valves in TFS heads come no where as near to the top of a piston as do AFR heads. How do I know? I have them installed on my 86 with flat top pistons and <"NO"> flycutting. Do a little research before coming to regurgitate stuff you "heard" from your buddies. I'll let you in on another little secret as well. If.... IF Michael Yount or Rick or 5Spd do happen to be wrong about something.... they will catch it looooooooong before you ever will and will post the correction. To refer to 5spd as "ignorant" while you sit there and spout grade school, play ground, theory about what you "think" makes sense and everyone else should swallow, just shows the depth or your own ignorance. You would do much better to just admit what you don't know and learn from the things that these folks are trying to tell you. The whole "look at me, I know everything" routine doesn't wash in this forum.

Click to expand...

according to AFR, they told me there are only maybe a clearance problem with 1986 or below because they have flat top pistons without the notches.

houstonstangguy said:

you say he didn't get the injectors because he needed them now, but rather because he plans on putting down 600rwhp?

if in fact he is going to make that much power he would be stupid to run 30lb injectors. why do you think that vortech recommends 36-42s with their S-Trim/SQ-Trim blowers? they make alot less power than you are talking about. Don't get me wrong, I am not ragging, just trying to point out the obvious. It just doesn't sound like he has really planned his application very well. You guys realize you can use smaller injectors with n/a applications than with forced induction right?

Click to expand...

all together with his mods he'll be getting around 450hp 650tq. the turbo itself is not gonna put out 600hp. thats alot of power for a stock block to take alone. the turbo will add about 200hp to his setup. 30lb injectors will be more than enough.

Michael Yount said:

raph - you don't seem to want to hear it from us; excerpt from Charles E. Probst book on Ford efi -- widely considered to be the bible on the Ford's efi systems. You've confused lower COOLANT temps with lower INTAKE AIR temps. From Probst --

"Some tuners recommend low-temperature thermostats. It's true that a cooler engine takes in cooler air - more pounds (mass) for more power. Sounds good, but lower coolant temperatures do not lower the temperature of intake air by the same amount.

There is one possible gain from a cooler thermostat: lowering head temperature may reduce probability of detonation. That means you can advance the spark timing for increased power. Except for the track, this is not one of your better ideas.

Most engines are designed to operate with a coolant temp of around 95C (200F). Unfortunately, lower coolant temperature will increase cylinder wall wear and, in cold climates, affect drivability. What's more, the cooling system operates with greater efficiency at the stock 200F degree temperature. So the lower-temperature thermostat could lead to overheating at high powers.

When I investigated this some time past, the Eveready engineers told me some NASCAR racers run 100% glycol in the cooling system so they can run the engine at higher temperatures. And in Europe, Honda found its racing engines operated more efficiently if they raised the air temperature. Something about lean-burn efficiency. How about that! Pass on cool thermostats."

That's what Mr. Probst has to say about cooler t'stats in the "Tuning for Performance...." section of his book. If you want to cool things down at the track - ice the intake. But pass on the 160F t'stat. 180 or 192 will work just fine.

Click to expand...

this is absurd. im really sick of hearing that whole phrase running a cooler thermostat increases cylinder and engine wear. that is a total myth. the first few seconds when your engine is started can cause a little wear thats not worth mentioning, and even this can be avoided by using oil that flows easily at cold temperature. your oil isn't coming anywhere close to being 0* by running the engine cooler. do you know how hot it is inside the cylinders? in fact inside the cylinders the temperature is over 1000* and engine oil can reach temps of over 500*

just because your coolant temp is at 160* or so does not mean the engine is. did you know that by driving on the highway for just a few mins can cool your radiator so much that your temp could be around 160* anyway? driving in cold weather close to 0* will keep your coolant around the same temp even while using a 195* t-stat. total bogus...

running an engine cooler than factory spec does not increase wear whatsoever. it actually helps the engine. a cooler engine is NOT a cold engine in any regards. what is cold??? anything below 20*F is a cold start.

the all popular 195* thermostats put in all factory cars is junk. it is there to control emissions and little do you know its also there to provide a little more destruction to the engine especially in the long run when something goes wrong your engine overheats very easily, some cars in excellent shape will overheat or have erratic temp and can easily be fully remedyed by going with a 160.

for example, the miata, or the famous 3.8l v6. ive owned and ive driven quiet a few v6 ford cars. know what i see? blown head gaskets. its a popular thing. 160* is the perfect temp. at that temp the engine seems more responsive and powerful. stick a 180* and the car seems alot sluggish, nevermind a 195 yuck. sure maybe to your average driver it seems pretty good to him because he doesn't know any better. run the engine a little cooler and your at that sweet spot the engine likes...youd have to have the engine oil at -20* F to lose 0.002 inch of bearing clearance. coolant temp cannot affect engine wear. oil temp can. coolant temp will always be at least 100*. i got this information right from Tanis Aircraft Services in Glenwood, Minn where they exclusilvly do tests of this nature because it gets extremely cold there in the winter.

raph130 said:

according to AFR, they told me there are only maybe a clearance problem with 1986 or below because they have flat top pistons without the notches.

Click to expand...

So then how is it that TFS heads can have P to V clearance problems on models later than 86 if not on the 86 istelf? Doesn't take pure genius to figure this out.

Daggar said:

So then how is it that TFS heads can have P to V clearance problems on models later than 86 if not on the 86 istelf? Doesn't take pure genius to figure this out.

Click to expand...

86 and below! email and ask them. i got this from them.

Rick 91GT said:

5spd GT if you need AFR's quick let me know

raph, something is wrong with your friends car. First adjusting Fuel Pressure only changes it at WOT, and at 15psi you have little to no spray pattern it is dribbling out of the injector. The stock EEC will adjust the pulse width of the injector based on the readings from various sensors and a factory fuel curve, after a few cycles no matter what you set the FP at the EEC will take over to try to get the car to a "stoich" setting.

30# inj are near dead on a 340RWHP car I have the datalogs to prove it.... 36# inj nearly maxed out at 425RWHP. Both of the above numbers are based on a 85% injector duty cycle at 42# of FP vac off.

If the car is LEAN down low or mid range you need a LARGER inj, it will provide more fuel based on a stock curve.

If the car is LEAN up TOP at WOT, you need to increase the pressure or swap to a LARGER injector. Adding pressure will help only so far once you get into the high 40's.

For a 600HP car I would have a low impedence 72# injector personally, although you could get by with a 50#-55# high impedence inj.

Click to expand...

i didn't know that only wot fuel pressure was adjustable. i could swear that base idle pressure is adjusted too when u bring down the pressure base idle fuel pressure will decrease also. where do you guys do to learn stuff?? lol

5spd GT said:

BTW if you have a place that can deliver the AFR 185's within a few days...btw tell me...

I was just referring to how some of your post have been in the past...fishy and unreliable...don't take offense to that...

Click to expand...

you can have anything you order online overnight if you want. its called overnight next day and usually costs $20 more.

"I didn't know that only wot fuel pressure was adjustable. "

Well, raph, everytime you post it becomes quite obvious to everyone who reads your posts that there's quite a bit you don't know. Even the w.o.t. tables can be adjusted over time by the computer's adaptive strategies. Why do you think they have O2 sensors and closed loop feedback? It's so the computer can control the mixture. They never intended fuel pressure to be altered -- that's why the factory regulator isn't adjustable. As stated many times before in this thread and others you've participated in, the correct way to adjust mixture is by changes to maf calibration, and changes to the ecu via chip or tweecer. Leave the fuel pressure alone. Trying to solve a mixture problem by playing with pressure is like taking an aspirin for the headache that comes from a brain tumor. Eventually, the problem is gonna be back - and worse.

5spd GT said:

"cmon he has a fresh 302 that he rebuilt himself"

That could have answered it...but I didn't say it was related to the "fresh 302"...there is some other fuel problem...

The fact is I find it hard to believe some things you say because most of your post are always trying to prove or be of the contrary to what is proven to be best...a search of your name would let others see the results...like your gear/160thermo/injector post...for example...

2 months huh? Wasn't aware of that...as I stated...must have been pretty recent...

And to further back up the "claims"...your signature says you have the fresh 302 but you just stated your friend has a fresh 302...and then that video you posted of your "friends" car looked exactly like the one in your avatar...

Your just posting things of the contrary just to stir up trouble or feel correct...

Click to expand...

actualy it seems that you are one picking and stiring things up. we BOTH own notchbacks with cowl hoods both painted black. they are basically identical on the outside except that he has a 4" an di have a 3" hood and he has a small wing.

"this is absurd. im really sick of hearing that whole phrase running a cooler thermostat increases cylinder and engine wear. that is a total myth. "

A hotter engine will run better and more efficient than a cooler and the reason they say the above is because when you cool down the area around the combustion chamber you are decreasing it's ability to fully ignite all contents of the chamber so this means the left over fuel washs down the cylinder walls cleaning it of oil. This is where the increased wear comes from. Running a cooler engine allows for more timing but but if it you don't get complete combustion then what good is running more timing? If using a cooler t-stat is better than why don't cars come from factory with 160 deg t-stats or better yet lower temp ones?

Michael Yount said:

"I didn't know that only wot fuel pressure was adjustable. "

Well, raph, everytime you post it becomes quite obvious to everyone who reads your posts that there's quite a bit you don't know. Even the w.o.t. tables can be adjusted over time by the computer's adaptive strategies. Why do you think they have O2 sensors and closed loop feedback? It's so the computer can control the mixture. They never intended fuel pressure to be altered -- that's why the factory regulator isn't adjustable. As stated many times before in this thread and others you've participated in, the correct way to adjust mixture is by changes to maf calibration, and changes to the ecu via chip or tweecer. Leave the fuel pressure alone. Trying to solve a mixture problem by playing with pressure is like taking an aspirin for the headache that comes from a brain tumor. Eventually, the problem is gonna be back - and worse.

Click to expand...

and slapping on 24lb injectors in a car made to have 19lb injectors and thinking the stock fuel pressure regulator will be fine at stock pressure and that it will run the same is f**king stupid! your pumping into the engine 21% more fuel! you can adjust the maf all you want it wont fix the richness problem. anywhere u go where you can order an afpr for the mustang it says this is required when putting bigger injectors in your mustang. im sorry but your stupid if you deny this. im out.

YOU ARE BIDDING ON A BRAND NEW Kirban Fuel Regulator for 86-93

1986-1993 Billet Aluminum Regulator (29-74 psi)

Fine tuning fuel pressure for more power can give you a performance edge, and is essential to get the most out of a highly modified Mustang.

Increase fuel delivery by raising pressure, or lower pressure below stock for a cleaner idle with *large injectors* or out-of-calibration air meters.