Hi Folks!

I ran across your board via a friend while doing some research.

You may see in my signature and accompanying side information that I am not, in fact, a 3rd gen owner. I hope you don't hold that against me too much. Especially since the rest of this post will concern a Ford that y'all seem very apt to stealing injectors from.

My mustang is not the a typical one (I really don't like a lot of the typical "5.0 crowd") ... I have an SVO engine in an LX under some pretty heavy modification. Ported everything up top, a freshened bottom end, air-water intercooler. Among various other saftey items.

The "next step" for many of my compatriots in the 2.3 Turbo community is to purchase $500 worth of tuning equipment for the stock style EEC-IV computer. The computer paired with our engines is really atrocious. It's a Vane-Air Meter type system and horribly obnoxious to tune and is NOT boost aware. It's barely even flow aware.

I think $500 is a bit rediculous for this (mind you it's with very good software) but it's still rediculous.

I've decided instead to acquire a 749 computer and adapt it to my car. But I do have a number of questions about the general operation of the computer (I'll probably have more later too, but lets see what I can do for now).

(1) Does the 749 Ground or Power the injectors? The Ford sends it a power.

(2) Can the 749 run 4 SVO Injectors (Peak and Hold type)? The answer is suspected to be in the archives but I was having difficulty finding it. Considering I already have the injectors installed it would make my life easier if I didnt have to modify the 749.

(3) What is the problems seen in using the Quad 4 version of the 749? I would suspect it cannot run the wastegate control, but is there anything else?

(4) The Ford TFI uses a 12V Square wave to drive it's "SPOUT" and the GM uses a 5V Square wave to drive it's "EST" signal. These appear to be the same (sans the voltage) can anyone verify or deny this fact?

Thank you in advance,

-Duck

 

GM ECM's ground the injectors. This keeps the ECM circuts from having to handle high electrical loads and keeps it running cooler.
This is an answer from another post. The answer is from Grumpy.
There are two options, Saturated at over 10, and Peak and hold that are less then 3.
He is talkng ohms here.
Grumpy addressed this also.

Using the 749 will let your use the Wastegate logic for something if you want.

Don't know this outright but I do believe the voltage is the only real difference.
I seem to remember reading on the old DIY mailing list of some people using GM's ECM's to run Ford engines and I know the dist functions were mentioned, but I can't remember the particulars of the conversions.

 

The responses to my second and third questions doesn't really answer it.

The Quad 4 does not have a wastegate to control. It's naturally aspirated. So do their versions of the 749 even have the hardware available?

-and-

I do know the two types of injectors. But how-many of what type can be supported in factory orientation? I believe hte Turbo sunbird used 4 Lo-impedence injectors, so I assume there would be no difference using them on the Ford with the SVO injectors.


Hm... I think I can get around the problem of hte GM grounding the injectors by using ... well... a Transistor.

-Duck

 

A 749 ECM is a 749 ECM, all that changes from one engine to another is the programming on the chip (calpack)

It will handle 8 injectors.

If I were to swap over to a GM ECM I'd just get the GM harness for whatever application you are going to run (ie 4 cylinder, 6 or 8) and then splice on the ford connectors where needed. But that's just me, I'm sure you have a plan you want to follow.

Check here http://www.speedtoys.com/~bort62/7749/Main.htm They go into detail about the 749 ECM swap and what it does.

 

Don't try to makr the power for the injector's too difficult! Just run power to one side (where F*** would be using ground) and the other side to the ECM to turn them on and off. No need for a transistor at all!

The Sunbird turbo does use 4 P&H injectors, so you're good to go there.

As for which version to run? I really don't know there, but I would think the Sunbird ($49) may be sort of close, but you should be able to run the $58 set to 4 cyl, and I believe it is better documented (hac'ed). I don't see any advantage to running the Quad 4 versions other than the engine size stuff, but that is VERY simple to change, and the rest of the tables, etc... will need ot be worked on anyway.

For the distributor issue, I have no idea what to do there! Maybe you can use the stock F*** pickup to trigger a GM module to get it to run? I'm pretty sure this is doable, but I have no hard evidence, experience, or otherwise, I just think I've heard of it being done before.

Hope I was of some help here!

 

Oh, and even though you're running a "foreign" (aka...Non-GM) vehicle, I don't think you'll get too much flack. Just it running a GM ECM and the rest is what this board does!

You may also want to look around on the diy-efi site, particularly in the email archives. Recently I remember someone running a jeep on a GM ECM, with the stock Jeep distributor (which in all reality is a F*** distributor!)



P.S. (F*** is me censoring myself! I really don't like those things! )

 

Hahaha - Yeah, well if you look at my list of fords you can see that they're not the standard-fare of Fords. The SHO (a damn nice daily driver if you don't mind fixing it all the time) and a sleeper 2.3 Turbo. Really makes the 5.0 guys mad when I'm faster than they are ... and how better to get even faster and make them more angry than using a GM computer. x 1000

Back to business. Just running the injectors to a 12V source where I put it on a ground... Jeeze Duck wake up on that one. Thanks for the slight kick to the head.

I've been working on modifying a $58 bin and plan on using it to do most of the dirty work.

The GM uses two signals, the Reference signal and the EST signal. The reference signal feeds in a 12V square wave to the ECU and it looks damn near identical to the 12V "PIP" signal that a ford TFI uses. The 5V EST signal is also a 12V signal that looks identical in shape and duration to a Ford TFI "SPOUT" signal. So I think I can just up the Volts on the 5V signal to a 12V signal and have everything work "close enough." Possibly using the "Bypass" signal to control the "SPOUT Switch."

-Duck

 

Ford's ECIV is the best EFI system ever designed. Why would anyone want to change it? You can easily convert the system to run under boost, even insane levels of boost. Plenty of 5.0 turbo guys are out there are doing it right now.

The ECIV is incredibly sophisticated. It uses 16 bit logic, rather than GM's 8. It's sequential injection rather than batch fire. It takes to modifications well, often not needing any computer tuning, even for radical combinations well over stock. It actually measures the airmass as opposed to guessing, which is the main reason GM guys that are serious learn to burn their own PROMs, because the airflow characteristics are usually figured out by trial and error.

You definately don't need $500 worth of tuning tools either. At most you need a DIY wideband kit and a DIY scan tool. There's instructions for both on this site. There's a Ford ECIV DIY scan tool out there. I've seen it, but can't remember where. The grand total for my scan tool was less than $40 including the cables. The wideband kit is going to cost a little more (heavily dependant on the sensor price), but will still be way cheaper than you can buy one. Really the best way to deal with the ECIV is a Crane Interceptor or other piggyback system. You really don't need to mess with the stock computer all that much, just tweak the input and output signals.

The Ford TIF distributor is crap. I will conceede that point. I'd convert to a DUI system (HEI style).

I've often thought about converting my TPI to ECIV, and may at some point. For now I'm just going to stick to learning to burn PROMs, which is a fact of life for GM ECU owners with modified cars.

I'm not trying to say don't do this swap, but I think there's a much easier way to achieve better results in the long term by sticking to most of the stock Ford hardware.

BTW, about half the guyrs here are running SVO injectors and a fair number have 9" rears. Brand loyalty can kiss my @$$.

 

TKOPerformance, Your post is well intended but quite misguided when it comes to the specific implementation of the EEC-IV when used on the Turbo-2.3. The version of the EEC-IV that I have to work with is the LA3. It's from a 1988 Thunderbird TurboCoupe and is considered one of the two desirable versions of the computer.

THIS version of EEC-IV is NOT MAF and is NOT Speed-Density. It DOES NOT work with the 5.0 computers and with the way ford has build the EEC-IV architecture the 5.0 (a9l + co.) computers will NOT function with a 4-cyl. With a Ford computer the number of cylinders CANNOT be changed.

In order to change the programming on a EEC-IV you need to purchase the EEC-Tuner. Then you need tuning software that will support either the PE-series or LA-series of EEC computers. The only really decent software that does so is PCMX (PCM-Explorer). This software and hardware packaged together will run $480.

The major problem with my current setup is multi-level:
(1) It's not an adaptive computer. It does not learn like the MAF or S/D versions of the computer does. No adaptive idle strategy and it doesn't change the internal tables.

(2) It's VANE-AIR-METER. This means there is a "flapper" door in front of my Turbo! Which, not only doesn't measure air flow after 5 psi of vacuum (IE when I have boost) but it provides an intake restriction before my compresssor!

(3) It's not cheaply tunable. Even if I manually edit the EEC-parameters the hardware is nearly $250 to do so with my computer. This model is not well supported and hte documentation is kept by a number of enthusiasts. Compared to the GM computers the documentation and hacking is very sparse.

The Crane interceptor, and DIY scan tool, you mentioned before DO NOT work with the 2.3 Turbo computers. My setup does not really like modification (will go rich/lean depending on what I do to it) *and* it doesn't measure air flow (back to the Vane-air meter).

In the end, the system really sucks for my car. 5.0's are fine, 2.3 Turbos were given the short end of the stick. Long run I'd be much better off with a fully tunable speed-density system.

-Duck

PS: the cost on the hardware to burn proms is negligable. my friends and I do a *lot* of stupid computer tricks that have already required us to have rom burners around... the one advantage to being a bit of a geek.

 

There's a few fast Fords running GM ecms.
With the 749 being junkyard available, and fully hac'd, it a no-brainer to run it.

Just feed the distributor pickup/reluctor signal to a GM ignition module, incorporate the GM IAC, and start tuning.

There comes point where things can get alot more sophisticated then what's necessary. Some of the Ford ecms do that. The racing box they offered for a while, and I guess now is made by some aftermarket co., is nice, if you have the money and time to play with it.

 

(1) Does the 749 Ground or Power the injectors? The Ford sends it a power.

(A) GM grounds the injectors.

(2) Can the 749 run 4 SVO Injectors (Peak and Hold type)? The answer is suspected to be in the archives but I was having difficulty finding it. Considering I already have the injectors installed it would make my life easier if I didnt have to modify the 749.

(A) Yes. As used in the Turbo Sunbird the 749 can run 4 P/H (low z) injectors. The drivers and biasing resistor can be upgraded to run 8 P/H injectors for you V8 guys..

(3) What is the problems seen in using the Quad 4 version of the 749? I would suspect it cannot run the wastegate control, but is there anything else?

(A) Quad4 is 1 bar, skip it. Use the $58 sunbird (and SyTY) code, 2 bar stock, 3 bar is available from the SyTy crowd.

(4) The Ford TFI uses a 12V Square wave to drive it's "SPOUT" and the GM uses a 5V Square wave to drive it's "EST" signal. These appear to be the same (sans the voltage) can anyone verify or deny this fact?

(A) Trash the TFI module and bolt a GM ign module to the side of your dizzy, the Ford pickup coil is compatable.



Also Ford's IAC will not work with this swap, you will need to adapt a GM IAC to your SVO.

cheers, Bob

 

Hey, you learn something new every day. I had no idea that there was such a difference between the 5.0 computers and the 2.3 turbo ones. I would have figured that all ECIV systems would have been similar. I've only had experience with 5.0 and 5.8 V8s and various stroker combinations of those motors. Everything '86-'93 is basically the same, and you can easily convert the SD ECUs to MAF. I can't believe that they use a VAM, that's like late 70s early 80s tech. Bosch systems use them that aren't even really electronic EFI.

That's also weak, because it means that the SVO (possibly the best handling Mustang ever) got this crappy setup. I've always been a fan of the SVO, because it was light years ahead of its time.

Another option you may want to consider is the Megasquirt. Car Craft profiled it recently. It's programmable EFI for about $250. It doesn't handle ignition though, only fuel, but it is boost capable in stock form. It is an 8-bit, SD system. I've done a lot of research into it, well before Car Craft picked up on the idea, and it looks like a good system for odd combinations. You might want to check it out.

 

Yeah, I've put my time into Megasquirt too. There are quite a number of people who are trying to get it to run. But for $250 I could have a *new* 2.0 Sunbird computer and all the associated hardware from the junkyard. For the $250 you get all the schematics and the layouts for the boards, and some of the chips/HW you need. There's still a lot to be purchased and a lot of wiriing to be modified. Plus, if you look at the number MegaSquirt kits sold versus the number of MegaSquirt success stories there is a bit of discrepency.

I'd like to thank everyone for their input this has been really useful!


One last thing just for clarification, if I take a quad 4 computer, with a Sunbird Bin, and I wire up the wastegate pin to a selenoid will it run it?

-Duck

 

Yes, but, you'll have to do a fair bit of experimenting on the bleeder orfice. Might try finding some data about how GM impliments Wastegates.

 

The TFI "pickup" is actually a hall-effect sensor, which is not compatible with the GM ign module. I'd need to spend aobut $75-80 getting an older magnetic pick up for a 2.3 and then getting it to wire back to the GM Ign Module. This would work, but I think I can use the GM computer to drive the TFI and will probably try that first. $3 in electronics parts versus $100 in a new dizzy + wiring sounds like a better idea.

I've got an adapter from a friend for an aftermarket fuel injection system that lets the GM IAC bolt right to a Ford Intake.

-Duck

 

Cool, so long as I get a 12V signal I think I can make a wastegate controller. A couple of selenoid valves would probably work.

One default to open and one to default to close.

The close default to work as a valve between the pressure of the engine and the wastegate actuator. And the other to work as a "vent" (allowing the wastegate actuator to depressurise) when the first valve is closed after pressure.

-Duck

 

No need to reinvent the wheel, just use the wastegate solenoid off of Turbo Sunbird.

 

I can't help much with the programming side of this, but I CAN tell you how to adapt the thing to your Ford ignition. I did it to my Jeep with its DuraCrap ignition system.
All you really need to do is think of the GM 8-pin module as a glorified set of points in a box. The dizzy pickup can be wired to the P and N terminals of the module. The + terminal needs 12V in RUN/START/TEST. The C is the coil trigger. The module basically breaks a ground and (like a points system) fires the coil. I figured this out when I was fighting with the wiring of the Accel ignition to my 8746 ECM...and subsequently the Jeep. It works great. I used the points trigger wire off the Accel 300+ box and all was well. The other 4 terminals go to the ECM.
PM/email me if you need a diagram.

 

I think a good idea would be to hit the salvage yards and pick up a DuraScrap distributor and wirte it the way jeepguy is talking about. The TFI system was NOT one of Ford's better ideas, and I'd just get it out of there!

Just my opinion on the matter!

 

For all the crap everyone talks about it, the ignition system really isn't that bad. The same TFI ignition module runs cars with 600-700 horsepower without fail. The only thing that sucks is when it gets heatsoaked and dies.

I'd probably have to set off to the parts store to get the distributor because the yards around here do not keep cars of that era around for very long. Since I live in the rust belt and those cars are pretty cancer prone they tend to die horrible deaths in this area. Winters can be a real bitch to live with sometimes.

Thanks for all the useful input guys!

-Duck

 

Even though I am not a big fan of the DuraSpark II and III systems (I basically loathe them) I have to admit that TFI is better than a volcano coil. I swapped to TFI from an OEM Jeep volcano coil several years ago...before I saw the light of GM EFI...and the difference in the AMC V8 was pretty obvious from the get go. The coil isn't really the problem...it's the POS controllers Ford used that were flawed from the very beginning. Pun one over about 5000 rpm and you will see what I am talking about...putt putt putt...cough...sputter...Anyway, as coils go, the TFI is about as rugged a coil as you can get. I ran that same TFI coil off my Accel 300+ ignition box before I got a new one with the matched coil (don't ask...long story) and that 3 year old TFI coil took every bit of the 600VDC pulses that Accel box can deliver. Impressive in my book for an off-the-shelf OEM replacement ignition coil of 1980's design. I still have that coil as a back-up if my Accel 140019 coil dies. What does that tell you?
If you get one (DuraCrap box) too hot and it melts the resin stuff, pop the hood and pour a cold soda on it. It'll probably get you home. This is a trick LONG known to the Jeepers of the CJ era.
Oh yeah...and if you have to get a DuraCrap box tested, just buy a new one. If they test GOOD, they're questionable at best. if they test BAD...then they are most definitely BAD.

 

Actually...now that I think about it, the Accel 140019 coil IS a TFI coil with a beefed up secodary winding.
Here...check it out
Accel 300+ Ignition system with TFI coil
This is the exact ignition system I am using in the Jeep and I love it. I personally feel that it stomps the shi+ out of an MSD 6-series and for the money...WITH a coil...you can't beat it.

 

Ok, so the TFI system isn't all THAT bad. The heat soak is a big issue though, and my lack of understanding of the system (and lack of desire to learn it on top of that!) make it look bad to me. I suppose it boils down to me stubborness!

I still think the DS distributor would be the way to go (magnetic pickup). Maybe you could find a cheap one on Ebay?

What would be even cooler would be running the GM DIS system on it! All it would take is making the a trigger wheel and mounting a crank sensor! Funstick has done this on a Honda that he has, so I know it CAN be done. Maybe something to do down the road to add to the coolness factor, or the "high tech"ness of it!

Again, I'm just tossin around some ideas!

 

Yep...lemme see if I can post the wiring diagram that I got from Bill-usn1.
There it is. Ignore the ballast resistor. You don't need it because the TFI coil is a full 12V coil.

 

Here's the way it is wired to my Accel box. The ORN and PUR wires can be insulated and tucked away. DO NOT CONNECT THEM TO THE DIZZY!!! The Accel box will probably go up in smoke because it will then have TWO trigger signals.
The stuff Summit told me was WRONG. The tech there didn't realize that I had a bastardized engine and ignition system in a Jeep. they will try to sell you a $75 harness that will hook the box right up to a GM wiring harness, but NOT to a Ford harness and since you are looking into doing exactly what I did, the GM adapter harness will not work for you...don't let 'em talk you into the adapter harness.

 

Oops...forgot the diagram...here it is...

 

Just a few tech notes.

Last I heard all the CDI were using 380 to 450v on the coil.
The fast rise time is what gets your the upper end performance gains, but that's at the expense of lower firing currents, and why they've HAD to go to multi spark at lower rpms. Run a single spark and a multi back to back and you can feel the difference.

And with CDI you should drop the timing back a degree or 3. Especially if your running large plug gaps.

The real *cure* is running more coils to allow for better coil saturation. Touch a coil after running for a while and you'll see it's realy hot. Touch a coil on an LS1, and they're much cooler. On the newer coils they even have heat sinks. Keeping the coils cool keeps the resistance down, and that means more current can flow thur the coil.

 

I'll agree with the heat sink thing. My coil has one. It also has a sticker that says LETHAL VOLTAGE on the top.
I'll check that voltage number later. I'm pretty sure Accel said something like 600VDC (pulsed) to the coil. That may have been a peak number.
Care to elaborate on the multiple coil thing? Wouldn't that require running multiple CD boxes and a coil junction?

 

I don't know what the nature of the problem with the TFI is, but I have had problems with spark scatter on every 5.0 and 5.8 I've modifed, even with simple bolt ons.

My most recent project was a 5.0 Mustang to which I added headers, hi-flow cats, 2.5" cat back, BBK cold air kit, 77mm mass air, 65mm TB & EGR plate with port matched upper intake, a Crane PS91 coil, and 9mm wires. That's a pretty mild combo in my opinion. The heads, cam, and shortblock are untouched. That combination would barely rev past 3,500 without a miss.

My solution was to use an MSD 6A and a Holley ignition module. With those parts it pulls right to the 6,250 rev limited with no problems. I think that the Ford module doesn't saturate the coil well enough, but that's just conjecture on my part. The important part is that I figured out how to fix it.

I've never had a problem with even a bone stock GM ignition, even on highly modified engines with aftermarket heads and cams.

 

The problem with TFI, IMHO, isn't the coil at all. It is the damnable DuraSpark ignition modules. I have read somewhere that there was a flaw in the design that caused misfires at and above a certain RPM. If the module gets too hot (as you have already said) it starts to misfire and eventually dies.
Get rid of the DuraCrap box and use a good CDI box of any kind and the TFI coil should be fine.