I've been working on retrofitting newer fuel injectors for the 914. My goal was to find an injector that can utilize as many of the stock parts as possible.

I came up with a inj. off a 96 forn escort 1.8l motor.

One comment is needed, this will only work with an aftermarket FI system s these inj. are HIGH inpedence.

This setup gives the ability to use higher fuel pressure, 44psi . It has a lower flow rate than the stock inj.. so the pulse widths will be longer and should give a little better idle quality.

these are disc style rather than pintle( stock). fuel atomization will be much better giving a cleaner, more efficiant burn.

The length of the inj. where shorter than stock so I added an O ring to make up the difference.

The plastic tips are different ,I cut them off and put the tip of the stock inj. on the new inj., fit perfect. now the stock tip O ring can be used.

the fuel rail was machined to tolerance for the top O ring seal. And I made a bracket to support the fuel rail from vibration and also keeping it from popping off the top of the inj.

Here's the setup assembled. enjoy

more

one more

toon1 you are the man - keep us posted as to performance gains : )

Who did the machining? Looks good.
Mark D.

Thank's, I did all the machining, I'm not a machinest so I kinof muddle through it. I have acess to tons of equip. at work.

Great stuff! Thanks for posting pics!

I'm going to try something similar myself along those same lines. I'd like to move away from stock injectors to something high impedence thats also newer than 35 years old.

What injector connectors are you going to use?

I'm using the connectors that go with the inj's., I got the inj. wire harness when I got the inj.

I finally got this done and the motor is torn down. It will be awhile before I get to use them I'm real anxious to see how they work


I'm supprised this went down the board so fast I figured more people would be interested. to my knowladge, this is the first ever retro of a non stock inj. utilizing almost all the stock components.

Even though this is for MS users only, this could open up possibility's to other retro fit's.

OH well, this will make the MS guy's happy, we now have a viable alternative to the stock inj's. These are more than readily avail. and cost $40/4, at PP.

Keith

I really like the manifold you built. I know we don't have flow issues on the teener but the billet just looks better than the stock pipe. Will there be enough room to drop the engine with the manifold in place?

Allowing my mind to wander much farther than it should...

If the impedence mismatch is the only thing that prevents using that injector on a stock d/l-jet could someone design a driver pack for it? Use the stock injector signal as input to a fast response driver and wire the output to the new injectors?

There would still need to be a way of compensating for a different flow rate (no chance the two have the same flow rate). That could be done grossly through the pressure regulator then fine tuned as per normal with the richness adjustment.

Am I being too simplistic?

the biillet fuel rail was necassary to utilize these inj.. They have an O ring ontop not a barb.

NO the inj,s and fuel rail will need to be removed for an engine drop.

If you could design a cheap, and easy way to use high imp. inj. with the stock syst., THAT WOULD BE HUGE!!!!!!!

There are plenty of inj's. avail. with flow rates close to stock that are much cheaper and readily avail. . I chose this inj. because I was going to use a different FP and wanted a higher press. fuel system for better atomization.

This would give everyone the ability to use the stock FP and REG and just change the inj's.

It seems Everyone here has been looking for a viable alternative to the stock inj. ,

Keith

'fraid my days of playing with electronics are long passed. When I last fiddled with design the Apple II and TRS80 were fighting for top dog honors!

But I know we have a bunch of bright young electronics guys on the board - maybe they could take up the challenge.

I'm impressed.
Keep us posted on your work.

nice job.....

for "brand" new Ford (and other) injectors along with new connectors, check out this place.... fiveOmotorsports, I bought 8 new injectors for my truck for about $300...

Thanks for the link!

I believe this IS a first for using aftermarket injectors on a stock intake system. Very nice work! I hope to follow someone soon.

This is exactly what I was contemplating for my T4 build, & I am glad you have chosen to be the "Trailblazer" so to speak.
However, I do need a bit more information or clarification. I cannot follow your customization of the new injectors. adding "O" rings here & changing the tip there is a bit crytic for me & I beg for more clarity.
Also, you indicate 4 injectors are available for $40 at "PP". I do not recognize the store. Please help. Do you have the part number for the injectors?

Hey Thumbs Up !

Thanx for saving a lot of time for other teeners looking for an option. Thats exactly how I would of done it.
The "easy to source" injectors are half the ball game. There doesn't seem to be another option for for the inj rail, modifying one would be the same work=$$, and yours look sweet.

Looks like a well thought out project

+Karma
Later

5.slow injectors work too and can be readily found on ebay for cheap (for 8) since those mustang guys are always upgrading.

Nice work btw!

Nice work!
I'm interested to see pictures of your wiring harness. Will it be cutom made?

Since the interest is growing , I will post more detailed pics. with regards to tip changing and other ?'s

Grey beard, if you look at some of the pics. you will see how I added an O ring to the new inj.body, above the stock 914 O ring. the new inj. was shorter, overall length than stock and the O ring added above makes up the difference for utilizing the 914 mounting hardware.

there is one pic. with the inj. side by side , the inj. on the left has the stock setup for the Ford escort. I cut that off and replaced it with the stock 914 plastic tip and seal.

PP stands for pick and pull, junk yard

Dominic, I am running MS so the wire harness is made for the MS system. I will use the inj. connectors that came off the escort and wire them into my harness. This is a great setup, the escort connectors fit real good, have seals and snap into place with keeper clips on the sides.

A little more info:


These injectors have a large size O ring on the top, 13.5mm, it was hard to find a drill or mill that would work. 1/2" is too small and 9/16 is too big.

I found a 9/16 end mill that had been resharpened and it was the excact size I needed. That was one of the most difficult parts of the project.

Keith

Hey Keith,

Sorry to dig up this old thread, but I was just thinking about your accomplishments and how everything worked out a few months down the road. Any issues with the connectors? Any MS tuning issues? You running 44psi with an adjustable FPR? I'd like to take on a similar project this winter and do the same.

I want to move away from factory injectors and PWM if possible.

Hope all is well.
--Yarin

I did some calculations with the ford escort inj. and determined they were a bit too small.

After running the calcs., I did some work with MS on stim and
With the flow rates of that inj., the duty cycle at WOT. was about 115%.

The FP would have had to been run at about 55psi to get the flow rate for 85% at WOT.
I had a set of four inj. from a ford probe INP480's. The flow rate was hard to find but it flowed about 21lbs/hr, about the same as the stock inj. but at 43psi.

After running those #'s on MS and the stim, it looked good. I had pw's at idle around 2.2ms.

these will also give the latatude to lower the FP, if needed and not hurt the fuel atomization.

The probe inj's had a smaller top so I made some new rails with smaller holes. otherwise everything else fit the same as the escort inj's.

The connectors where no prob., I just cut them off the wire harness of the probe.
they fit just fine with the inj's. in the rails.

I have not put them on the wire harness yet but will soon.

with the inj's. on the air intake runners which are installed on the motor, it all looks good

I am also retrofitting an EDIS system to the motor,direct coil drive so I have to add a 2nd coil driver.

The engine parts took forever to get back from the machinest(4months!).

Right now the engine is built and close to being ready for install. Unfortunatly I have run into probs. with my truck. The tranny had to be replaced and also the intake man. gaskets so it has be occupiing my time for the past few day's

The car is still a way's off from running but I am anxious to get it going.

Keith

Hey Toon,

it looks real good and i'm doing the same thing on mine but you're ahead with the fuel rail part. I'm still on soldering the boards now.

Maybe some of you guys may not realized this, MegaSquirt fuel metering unit will litterally replace all the old 914 fuel system components (such as AAR, 914 FPR, brain, etc) that are intertwined together in order to function. It's such a pain in the ass to find replacements on some of these components, in fact, NLA!! I CAN'T HARDLY WAIT TO TRY THE MS AND SEE HOW WELL IT WOULD RUN!!! One of these days, I'll get the MS that will deal with fuel metering and spark control, boy, that ought to help a lot and eliminate the distributor issues.

I was a bit surprised you had to use the escort FI connectors. If I remembered right, they're the same as the Bosch connectors (T1) except for some bigger injectors that use Ford connectors (T4). I would also use the 914 harness and spline the end of harness (toward the brain) into the MS plug pigtail, that way I can keep the appearance of 914 harness.

anyway, keep on going Toon, and hopefully i'll get around to show you mine. Right now, I'm doing one for my Audi Turbo Quattro then will do my 914.

cheers,
j

With running MS you can do away with almost all of the stock FI components.
I am using the CHTS and the ATS with easytherm

The AAR can ( and in my case, will) be replaced with a fast idle selonoid. This will give the user the ability to shut off the air bypass when the CHTS reaches the temp. that MS ignores it. this will be nice to get away from the lean miss that accomponies a lagging AAR.

It is possible to run MS1 and control spark with MS&S extra if you don't wont to shell out the $$$ for a MSII.

In regards to the inj. connectors, I wanted to use the Ford connectors because, to me, they are a far superior connector than stock. There is a rubber seal rather than a boot and it locks into place.

Good luck with the Audi sounds like a fun project. Doing a MS retrofit has made me a FI junkie.

My next project is to fuel inject my 32hp briggs and stratton boat motor

Yeah, your set up sounds good and yes, my AAR will go! I haven't gone that far with the 914 yet as Im still bitchin with the Quattro. I'm trying to retain the original CIS metering ("locked into full flow") and lines toward the intake manifold while sticking the electronic injectors underneath a hidden fuel rail for the sake of passing the visual inspection at the smog station. It's real PITA but i'm getting there.

Speaking of Bosch plugs, no, they do have the rubber seals inside the plugs and I make sure of that before I plug em in. I like to keep everything "dressed" in German as much as I can and hell, you could fake the whole thing by sticking the MS internals inside the gutted 914 ecu, and leave the POS 914 fuel system components in (by pass it all with fake vacuum lines and wiring for appearance purpose) and the only thing would look a bit out of place, a different fuel rail than the tube ones. That would be fine with me as the whole replacement with MS is a big improvement over the stock ones.

Oh yes, it will be running in line with Innovance A/F metering and CHT set up to be sure of my fuel mapping at different speed setting without ending up or finding some melted puddles of aluminum on the ground!

When I get around to do the 914, I'll holler for help....

j

If you are looking to keep things looking stock, Dave hunt did a 914 with MS and hid all the components.

There is a write up on it. He did a very good job. Do a search it should give you some good idea's.

Hey Keith,

What were the flow #s for the Ford Escort injectors that you determined were too low? (15-16 lbs/hr?)

Stock injectors flow:
Yellow (1.7L) - 265 cc/min (25.2 lbs/hr) @ 2.0 Bar
Green (2.0L) - 380 cc/min (36.1 lbs/hr) @ 2.0 Bar

The theoretical mechanical limitations of most injectors to open/close are about 1.7ms from what I've read. So in your case PWs of 2.2ms are great and leave with you plenty of room to play. May I ask how you arrived at 2.2ms?

Looking at my datalogs I see that at idle my PWs are 1.3-1.4ms, I never really analyzed this but this is a problem since the injectors are limited to 1.7ms. Correct? Should I change # of squirts to 2 instead of 4 (double req calc req fuel from 4.2 to 8.4ms) will yield PW of 1.77ms.

The equation is PW = REQ_FUEL * VE * MAP * E + accel + Injector_open_time
If I do the calcs manually I should get 4.2ms * 30% x (29 / 100 kpa) + 1.0ms = 1.36ms which is what i see in my datalogs.

In addition, with the Green 2.0L injectors my max situations are as follows:
WOT @ 5000-5500 rpm, PW ~4.2ms, Duty cycle 39%, AFR is really rich at around 11.6. I can send my datalog for anyone that is interested. This just illustrates that these injectors are WAY oversized as previously mentioned.

I'm looking at this Injector flow table trying to figure out which injectors I want to go with: http://users.erols.com/srweiss/tableifc.htm I want to go with high impedence so I can move away from PWM. Any suggestions?

I found some more info on your Ford Probe injectors here: http://www.fuelinjector.citymaker.com/page/page/5129028.htm
1993-97 application. Here is a set on ebay. Too $$ though. I'd rather buy a used set and send them off to cruzin performance.

I'll keep an eye out for ~21-22lb injectors cross referenced between This site for flow data and This site for application then check ebay periodically.

Any tips would be most appreciated, also I haven't looked at MS fuel requirements and PW in over a year so i might be a little rusty.

Thanks@

I merged two databases of info to help others select injectors based on flow criteria and application.

Info came from http://users.erols.com/srweiss/tableifc.htm & http://www.fuelinjector.citymaker.com/page/page/2235688.htm

Used an Excel merge add in and cleaned up the headers a bit. Works really well, it's sorted by Order Part #. Just sort to your preference, or use autofilter to enter the criteria of your filter (ie: impedence, rated PSI, car, type, etc).

There are hidden columns that give BSFC Est hp at 80, 95% duty cycle. Just unhide them. I put way too much time in this, hope it helps people in other applications as well.

Just to remind myself that I need to use injectors that are will utilize the stock 2.0L injector mouting hardware. Like toon1, i'll fabricate a fuel rail.

Enjoy!

really impressive keith
when your at the test drive stage stop by i'd really like to see how it all looks.

do you think it could be possible to run these injectors with boosted fuel pressure on d-jet to take advantage of the atomazation of the modern injectors? i know that is very simplistic but could it be possible to more or less use them with maybe mps/fuel pressure adjustment?
mike

I have found that injectors operating over 80% duty have seriously diminished lives, some lasting only a few thousand miles. I do prefer a tad higher FP and duty cycle using smaller injectors to really boost down low performance and drivability, but their are downfalls to this.

You'll more than likely see that the calculations are just that as you start tuning. Cam, heads, air density and exhaust system effectiveness all impact the tuning of the system. Don't be disappointed if all the calculations and math get you no where.

I just went through this as I completed development of the Pinzgauer EFI system last month when things didn't go as calculated at all....

Good luck with MS, I have nothing good to say about it at this point after it cost me 5 years of greif with Dave Hunt's builds and consistent failure.

http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?sho...c=77265&hl=

quote from thread "For #3 and #4- replace the injectors. I'm currently having no problem with my Niehoff injectors for 1974 Mercedes 450 SEL. They were only $49.99 at PartsAmerica.com brand new- not refurbished. I only have 2000 miles and 2 years on them though, so it's early to tell how the reliability stacks up."

jim

Hi guy's, I will try to catchup, I've been hunting all w/e.

Yaring the ford escort inj's are 14lbs/ hr which @ 85% D.C. gives about 11lbs/hr.

Yo give it a try , I put the MS on the stim and entered the flow rates on the req fuel and gave it a try.

It, at first came back with 115% so I started raising the flow rates until I found about 85%D.C..

It was determined that the F.P. would have had to been run @ 55psi.

I already had a set of the ford prob inj's. and one I found the flow rates, I entered those#'s into MS and again worked on the stim.

They where much better.

you could go with these inj.s for your setup and they should be fine.

Most of the inj. bodies are the same dia. but the ford inj.'s where about 3mm shorter so I added the O rings above the stock 914 O ring.

1.7ms for opening time is really low and I found that 4squirts "semms" to be better.

You could LOWER your FP with the green top inj's OR run the yellow inj. in your car. They will flow PLENTY of fuel for a 2L. The lower flow rate should give you better PW's

My motor had a really high map, like 54kpa. couldn't seem to get it lower. I tore the motor apart before I could do some seriuos tuning.

One thing to remember Yarin, tou have a vac. referanced reg. this helpsalot when running big inj. I still think the yellow top( for the time being) are worth a shot, if you have a set.

BTW I pulled the probe inj's. at pick and pull, $10 ea.

Jake, I know you don't like MS. In your opinion, what are the probs. you have encountered?
DO you thing, bacause of the size of Daves motor, it was giving you fits? I can't see why Daves motor would be different than any other motor.

Mike, I sure will bring the car by to take a look.

great info! i'm interested in how you're going to mount your trigger wheel for EDIS as I am interested in running MSnEDIS as well (main reason for buying a f.i. 914)....i've got both running on my vw and love it. thanks for the updates

The EDIS wheel is already mounted. The wheel needs to be separated from the ford harm. balancer and a disc made to adapt the trigger wheel to the TIV.

I used 1/8" alum. I machined a hole in the center within a couple thou. of the crank hub. This gave it a nice, NO SLOP fit. I then machined the outside of the disc so it was perfectly round.

The wheel was chucked up next. There is an inner edge (flat spot), I machined an indetation on the flat spot to accept the alum. disc.. I then drilled 4 10/32 holes around the out edge to hold the disc to the wheel.

The back of the fan was milled down to make up for the different thickenss of the alum disc vs. the stock washer.

I mounted the vr sensor to the fan housing top pass side just fwd of the oil sending unit



Jake will have a bolt on disc. avail soon at a great price.

awesome. do you have any pics of your setup? happy to hear someone will have a bolt-on wheel...i had a whirl of a time getting my trigger wheel mounted on my vw engine...

Yhere is a pic., do a search for " been workin" or toon1, it's my progress thread.

I will be taking more and adding dimentions for Brere's MS file

I don't like experimental things, unless those who are experimenting are in the position to prove them. IMHO MS is too broadly used and has too many bells and whistles that can be configured for too many things- thats never good for the guy like most of you- playing in the garage.



No. The issues I observed were related to the hardware and all the crap that one must go through to make a harnass, set up parameters on injectors and sensors and all of that.


It wasn't and thats why I refuse to sell one of my kits to anyone using MS after the FIVE YEARS of bullshit that MS caused for me, Charles @ LN and Dave himself.

Sure the system is cheap, but dave could have bought an M400 Motec for what he spent on time and labor repairing the issues that MS caused. My wallet was about 4K lighter and Charles @ LN spent double that supporting dave's project (when we didn't have to.

In fact, the experience that we went through with Dave has mandated huge changes to my 2008 engine kit program. History will not repeat it's self.

What does SDS offer that cannot be had on MS?

I know the fuel tables are 16x16. Are the sensors different?

The main advantage of SDS was it is proven, well proven and has a robotically assembled board and specific wire harnass and COMES WITH all the sensors that are compatible with it... This means no guess work. It also comes with support from SDS that is unparalleled- not even Motec matches the service and support from SDS and I have experienced both!

It also has simplicity, this is the reason i use it on my turn key engines- If the system is too difficult to tune chances are it will never be totally optimized.

Too much bulshit kills engines, bells and whistles are effective marketing items but they compromise practical application so many times.

SDS has everything it needs, and nothing that it doesn't- I drive one everyday.

what type of sensors does it have. Are they specific to SDS or GM?

Jake, what are the AFR's your running with the 02 sensor?

Yes, they are all GM excet the CHT which is Bosch..

I tune for 13:1 AFR and tweak timing to find the optimum EGT.

Good info.are you going 13:1 accross the board.

What EGT's are normal for these motors?

I thought Dave Hunts problems mostly related to MS inability to properly deal with fuel metering during deceleration?

Unfortunately, stock 914 FI harnesses are not capable of being used for these PEFI systems even with significant modifications. The circuitry requirements are completely different.

I completely concur with most of Jakes points, SDS is a great solution for most 914 owners and I would choose it over MS anyday. But please, keep it simple...most 914 owners just need a simple D-jet/L-jet replacement, which does not require ignition control. Fuel-only is sufficient, the more complex, the more that can break. Only get ingition control if it is a necessity.

SDS is to be commended for providing a basic harness, but their harness is not a very good solution for the 914s engine bay layout or for long-term serviceability. Plan to spend a significant amount of time/budget on the harness design and fabrication if you want a durable and reliable installation. Think about an optimum 914 engine bay layout, EMI-issues/grounding/shielding, durable connections, and protecting the wires and connections form heat and contamination.

With the ignition system that the 914 provides, I feel that you can do NO wrong by changing it.

With the EDIS system being so avail., robust and proven, it's hard to argue against a retrofit.

Just my .02

I tried using high impedence injectors from a 89 vanagon 2.1 and they seemed to strangle the system. It needed to be tuned too rich all the time. I switched back to stock injectors and now have the mixture in the dead center of lean and rich to tune, also better idle as well as smoother running through the spectrum. I'm using the SDS EM4. My mechanic likes it because it's infinitely tunable. He's going to take it to the dynojet in the next week or so to make fine tunings throughout the range. I liked the idea of using high impedence injectors also but the flow just wasn't good enough.

Were you using the low impedence resistor pack with these injectors??? If so that was the issue!

Nope, it was wired correctly. Added the resistor pack after putting the original injectors back in. i do have a set of 4 of the vanagon injectors if anyone needs any. 0280 150 206

That's a weird one.

One inj. you have to add imp.

The other is built in

There should be no diffrence in hoe the inj. or the system functions.

Hey! if it's working ,that's a good thing


Jake, what are you AFR's when you start to tune? Is it 13:1 accross the board?

What are good EGT's.

See my sig for linky to my SDS install. I have had no harness issues in a year of auto crossing. I mounted the SDS "brain" in the back trunk, and drilled a hole to run the wires. I ran all the ECU related wires, as well as fuel lines, across the back wall of the engine compartment. The coil pack is mounted on the front wall of the engine area. The plug wires do not cross any of the sensor or injector wires. The wires to the coil pac run along the engine tin on the battery side of the engine room. I sent several diagrams and talked with the guys at SDS several times to lay this out prior to ordering the system, and have been nothing but satisfied with the purchase.

Here is the SDS project link, the one below is for the turbo upgrade.

http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?sho...c=53733&hl=

Enjoy.

I have never had an SDS harness issue either.. The harness in my 912E has been installed and used for almost 4 years(70K miles) and the system hasn't been touched.

I trusted SDS and their harness enough to be the base of my Pinzgauer EFI retrofit arrangement that I have recently completed (thank god!).

This system belongs on the below pictured Swiss Army vehicle with it's 2.5L inline 4 cylinder AIRCOOLED engine.


And I have no problem submerging the SDS harness to prove it's integrity. More than likely that will be happening this weekend!!

Ah yes, I remember that beast.

Dave