How much tuning can be performed on one of these?

tlmartin84

Registered User
I am a new guy here, please feel free to correct anything I post or ask that is wrong.

I am interested in knowing how "tunable" the ecm is on the super coupes. Can you control an electric fan with it, adjust timing, fuel mixtures, etc?
 
Binary Editor software with a Moates Quarterhorse hardware is you will need to accomplish this.
 
OK let me ask you this, I am a fabricator not much on the electronics.

My current project is a 1956 F100. It will be running a supercharged 300 inline six cylinder, I had planned to run it on a megasquirt computer.

I just recently started acquiring parts for the 3.8 to use on the 300. Do you all think the super coupe system could be made to work on this engine? Assuming I switch everything from the 3.8 over to the 300. EDIS system, trigger wheel, computer, etc. Can I adjust the firing order to match that of the 300?

It fires 153624.......I am assuming it wouldn't really matter as I could switch around the wires no matter what the ecm output is.

If the QH works that well, wonder if it would work with the stock 88 f150 ecm. The only thing I am not certain of is if it would recognize the MAF and whether or not it could control the EDIS system.

It has TFI now, I have been led to believe that it is not nearly accurate enough for a forced induction motor.
 
I think XR7 Dave will need to chime in here. Not sure how it would work on a straight 6. The crank trigger gives the timing for the spark and the cam sensor controls the injectors.

The problem with the f150 computer would be that someone would have to create the definition file and tune for the f150 to use BE and the QH. Which I don't believe there is one.
 
There is what can be done and then what it is practical to do. If you don't have a lot of electronics understanding then I don't suggest trying to adapt a completely different system as you will run into issues that you didn't anticipate, that no one else predicted, and which you will be left to solve on your own.

That being said, the SC computer can run the TFI system that you have on your truck engine. But you'll have to configure it correctly and you'll need to make wiring changes. It's not plug and play and I don't have schematics to be able to help you out.

Your existing system has nearly no support. I can write a chip for it all day long, but you can't tune it or make any changes yourself so I don't see that being a good long term solution. The truck processor is the same processor as the SC, it's just programmed different and the hardware outputs are different. From a hardware standpoint, your EEC is fully capable of running a turbo or whatever you want, but from a software standpoint, there is not enough aftermarket support to bother with the 88 P/U EEC.

You need to convert to a supported software platform which would be any Mustang or SC processor from 89-93. The Mustang has the same layout as your distributor based TFI system so it would require the least adaptation. Also, be aware that DIS (89-93 SC) and EDIS (94-95 SC) are two different types of ignition systems, just FYI.

All MAF based Ford systems are fully capable of running any form of forced induction you want, so that is the least of your worries. Ford processors process all required engine management functions on a per event schedule. IE, it reacts between the time it takes one cylinder to fire vs. the next until it reaches the limit of it's clock speed which in terms of an rpm limit, on a 6 cylinder engine would be north of 7500rpm. You won't have any issues with processor capability on any Ford EEC IV system.
 
Ok, then what would you do?

Go on ahead with the Megasquirt system as I had originally planned with an EDIS system (It is going to be a little pricey but not too bad)...... and

Or

Stick with the F150 electronics and add a Mustang/SC computer to the system. Switch my ignition system to the EDIS, and only use the distributor for the cam position sensor. I would like to have Sequential injection. I assume I would need a 6 cylinder computer and EDIS system?

I want as much control as possible. The goal is to get optimal fuel economy while still maintaining performance level HP/Torque Numbers.


That being said, maybe I am grasping at straws and the TFI system would be more than sufficient. There is nothing about this build that has been normal or easy, so I accept the challenge of wading through the unknowns..........
 
I would head to the F150 forums and ask them there. I know the tweecer seems to be the prefered tuner option in the F150 crowd. They may be able to give you more info and have a tuning file available to simplify your process. Cost is less than the Moates stuff and way less than the Mega squirt. The mega squirt is really overkill for your application considering how tunable the factory Ford parts are and mild your application is.
 
I want as much control as possible. The goal is to get optimal fuel economy while still maintaining performance level HP/Torque Numbers.

Megasquirt is essentially speed density control. Very similar to most GM control systems. EEC-IV is MAF control.
Either one can meet your goals. With either one you'll need to get deeper into understanding the control system than you probably want to.
With either system you'll need wide band oxygen sensor. Either system will allow you to datalog.

Cost wise, you need the chip and software for the EEC-IV as well as the EEC-IV. Figure around $600. (maybe less)

With Megasquirt you have a lot of others that share their experience and thoughts. Many are wrong.
With EEC-IV you can find a lot of others that share their experience and thoughts. Many are wrong.

So which do you pick when you have zero experience with any of them? I guess if you are not getting into this to play with control systems and want something that will just reliably run your truck, I'd go with the EEC-IV. The hardware has already been proven in automotive environments to be reliable and it will interface with your Ford sensors.
 
So which do you pick when you have zero experience with any of them? I guess if you are not getting into this to play with control systems and want something that will just reliably run your truck, I'd go with the EEC-IV. The hardware has already been proven in automotive environments to be reliable and it will interface with your Ford sensors.

I do want to be able to control my fuel mix tables, I also want to be able to performance vs economy tune.

As far as my understanding, I have a good grasp on it. Just a little unsure of the components. I have experience with PLC's so I imagine tuning these to be the same concept. Just a matter of figuring out whats the best overall fit.

The supercoupes just run an MAF sensor, do they run wide band or narrow O2's? I just assumed ford would have done something sepcial with the s/c engines along the lines of a MAP........
 
Ok, then what would you do?

Go on ahead with the Megasquirt system as I had originally planned with an EDIS system (It is going to be a little pricey but not too bad)...... and

Or

Stick with the F150 electronics and add a Mustang/SC computer to the system. Switch my ignition system to the EDIS, and only use the distributor for the cam position sensor. I would like to have Sequential injection. I assume I would need a 6 cylinder computer and EDIS system?

I want as much control as possible. The goal is to get optimal fuel economy while still maintaining performance level HP/Torque Numbers.


That being said, maybe I am grasping at straws and the TFI system would be more than sufficient. There is nothing about this build that has been normal or easy, so I accept the challenge of wading through the unknowns..........

I would use the EEC IV. It's much easier to tune since you don't have to create fuel tables at all, it's just a MAF curve. It's more adaptable - you don't have to re-tune as much when you change things, etc. It's also more reliable because it's an OE Ford system as opposed to a glamorized DIY board. That makes a big difference when it comes to troubleshooting later on.

I'm not sure what you mean about sequential fuel injection. All EEC IV is sequential fuel injection.


As for EDIS/DIS/TFI, it seems like you may not really understand what that means. 89-93 SC's are distributorless TFI. Yes, it's the same thing as what you already have, just different format/layout. Only the 94/5 SC's were EDIS. You can run TFI based DIS or you can run EDIS, but IMO that's just over complicating things for no real purpose. The distributor based TFI system you have will work just fine, there is no need to complicate things.

As for 6cyl vs. 8cyl, all Ford EEC's are capable of running in 4/6/8 configuration and some as any as 12 cyl or more. In your case it's all software code to convert a 5.0 processor to 6 cylinder. I suggested the 89-93 Mustang processor because it has the best software support, is easy to get hold of, and is already TFI so interface will be simple.

Yes, it's going to cost about $500-600 to get completely set up with the QH, but it's superior to anything else out there. You'll have more control than you know what to do with.
 
What year is your 300/harness if its pre 94 (if memory serves) you'll be Speed Density and not Mass Air--I know my dad's 90 is SD. Making it MAF is no big deal but figure that into your cost.

I too suggest a Mustang EEC, easier to find and more support.
 
I do want to be able to control my fuel mix tables, I also want to be able to performance vs economy tune.

As far as my understanding, I have a good grasp on it. Just a little unsure of the components. I have experience with PLC's so I imagine tuning these to be the same concept. Just a matter of figuring out whats the best overall fit.

The supercoupes just run an MAF sensor, do they run wide band or narrow O2's? I just assumed ford would have done something sepcial with the s/c engines along the lines of a MAP........

Ford didn't start using wide band 02's until nearly 20yrs after the SC was out of production, so they are all narrowband. Most people do assume that some special wizardry is necessary to run forced induction, but that's not the case. All Ford processors are fully capable of supporting boost. By the same token, there is no need for MAP when you have an accurate MAF. The only difference between an NA Ford and a forced induction Ford is how far up the load scale you want to go. All Ford EEC's are fully capable of running any sort of boost you might want, it's just that we don't have the ability to live tune all of them. This is why the QH and supported processors are such a big deal - live data retrieval and live tuning. If there was a strategy file available for your processor then you'd be able to keep your stock EEC. I could be wrong, but I'm 99% positive there is no support for your processor.

All Ford's of this time period were all straight MAF which is why tuning is so simple. With the QH you have pretty much complete access to the entire memory banks, so if it's part of the program/strategy, you can control it. You can't really force it to do an economy tune though because that's actually part of a performance tune. The EEC knows when it's under light load getting good mileage vs. being under load and needing to make power. Optimal is optimal, regardless of how you are using it. There is no reason in the world not to be able to achieve both goals in one tune, but you'll see that once you get into it.
 
Pulled my shop manual. It list it as a MAP up until 95. 95 and 96 were MAF.

I checked rockauto and they list MAP's for the SC and Mustangs up to 95 as well.

So from the sound of it I should be able to run all of my current setup? Just swipe a computer and piece of the harness from a parts yard, then tie it into my harness.

Now what type of chip do I need?
 
I checked rockauto and they list MAP's for the SC and Mustangs up to 95 as well.

SC are a MAF controled fueling. If rockauto is saying there is a MAP sensor it is kinda of wrong. The SC does have a pressure sensor but it is a BAP not a MAP sensor. It senses external barometric pressure to assist with changes needed to optimize fueling for various altitudes at run time. Cars of the time with MAF that didn't have a bap sensor would sense barometric pressure when the ignition was turned on and never sample it again. That would cause the fueling to be non-optimal say as a car would drive from LA to Denver. The SC uses BAP as a input at run time so it can adjust as needed while the car is in motion.

Speed density vehicles need MAP as an input to their lookup tables. the SC doesn't use manifold pressure in any fueling calculations.

You'll need a crank signal. 89-93 use a 3 vane wheel with a crank sensor and a cam sensor. you need to provide engine coolant sensor, intake air temp sensor, BAP sensor, throttle possition sensor, MAF sensor, oxygen sensors. The wide band would be used for tuning, and some wide bands can simulate a narrow band if you want to use it for that as well.
 
He already has all that stuff with the 88 SD system. He just needs the parts for the MAF conversion. I suggest getting a whole wiring harness + EEC from the Mustang. It will make things easier. Or you could get a "hot rod" Mustang wiring harness from one of the restoration parts houses and use that along with the Mustang EEC. The truck EEC harness will be missing a bunch of wires so it's best to start with a harness that has enough wires in it. Since this is a completely custom installation anyway, I'd be inclined to buy a new harness but that's your call obviously.
 
Just learned that the 96 300 were MAF and had cam sensors and crank triggers. These use the OBD II.

I wonder how tunable that computer would be? Regardless it would probablly be easier to swipe a harness, MAF, trigger wheel etc. from one of those vehicles......am I correct?
 
Just learned that the 96 300 were MAF and had cam sensors and crank triggers. These use the OBD II.

I wonder how tunable that computer would be? Regardless it would probablly be easier to swipe a harness, MAF, trigger wheel etc. from one of those vehicles......am I correct?

Should be easier. I'm not familiar if there were any physical changes that might cause a problem (like crank sensor mounting, etc.). SCT offers support so you'd just need to get an X3 and Pro Racer package to be able to tune it. Cost would be in the $600-700 range to get set up with that and a base tune (or you could also attempt it yourself for a little bit less $$). Assuming you get to that point with it, I'm a dealer and can set you up with a base tune if you want, or just source the hardware and license for you if you want.
 
Back
Top