Classic cars forum & vehicle restoration.

[ukdave2002]

There seems to be growing interest in installing Electronic Fuel Injection into older cars.

In this months PC they are putting an EFI system on an Austin A40 using a UK designed ECU and monitoring bits (MAP, Airflow, temp etc) sensors from the scrap yards with bike throttle body's.

I have been looking at the MagaSquirt website for some time, similar concept; you can buy the ECU, map it yourself and complete the build with common sensors easily available sensors.

I think currently there is more activity in the US than UK, anyone doing anything along these lines?.

If you are running a classic as an every day car could be a useful upgrade.
The MagaSquirt site is very informative, aimed at DIY folk; it takes a lot of the “Black Magic” out of EFI.


http://www.megasquirt.info/

[Uncle Joe]

Thanks for the link UK.

I had a look into efi a while ago, came to the conclusion that the preferable system would be the mass flow type. The biggest drawback however was the cost.

[Red Riley]

[Uncle Joe]

From what I saw when I was looking into this, on the plus side for efi is fuel economy and less pollution....but only if installed correctly.

Going back to the A40 mentioned, I'd like to see the results on the engine, and hope someone will post a summary.

I cant imagine much improvement on an A series though....

[Old-Nail]

I don't like the idea of moving away from how the vehicle was driven in it's day with mods like fuel injection.

The Citroen 2cv that I run as a daily driver has two cylinders, one carb and points ignition, and that car will start and run in conditions of - 30 to plus 30 degrees and return 50mpg.

There are upgrades for the engine which include electronic ignition, but I leave it standard because it works And should the points fail (never have) I can carry a spare set and fix it, I see fuel injection along similar lines, a well set up standard vehicle should run fine, 'modernising' the fuel mapping etc would remove the classic driving 'experience' for me.

[Rick]

I agree with old nail really.

A few modern tweaks don't harm, and if easily reversible can always be taken off later and put back to original (I'm thinking a twin carb conversion, radial instead of crossply tyres, electronic ignition at a push, that kind of thing). But something so out of character as fuel injection on, say, an A40 just doesn't seem right or necessary - bordering on customising territory. What next? a turbo, modern engine coupled to an auto box? too much of this kind of thing and it'd only look like an old car, but drive (if the job has been done well) like a new 'un. As ON says, part of the charm of an oldie is how it drives, even if the engine is a bit wheezy, and the suspension pre-historic.

On the other hand, I do sometimes like major mods, but only if using period parts. I had a look at an MO Oxford the other day, which had been converted to B series running gear. It was a neat installation, and the kind of upgrade that could well have been done in period. Ok no longer original, but still using BMC parts, and still no silly black boxes or (shudder) allen keys in sight.

R
_________________
Rick - Admin
Home:https://www.oldclassiccar.co.uk
Videos:https://www.youtube.com/user/oldclassiccarRJ/videos
OCC & classic car merchandise (Austin, Ford ++):
https://www.redbubble.com/people/OldClassicCar/shop

[Red Riley]

I am going to be a grumpy old man now.

As I only buy PC sporadically these days, I don't know whether the car they are modifying is a Mk. I or II A40, but if my memory serves me correctly, the bulk of the Mk. IIs had an SU carburettor - the best fuel system known to man! Alright, the Mk. I had a less satisfactory Zenith, but the upgrade I would make in that case would be to simply install an SU.

Mk. IIs do, what 37 mpg in the normal course of events and the Mk. I maybe a couple more. Given that the gearing is quite low, I just can't see that being improved by anything more than a marginal amount. I think if anything, performance is most likely to be improved, and even if this is boosted into the low 80s, you still get p*ssed all over by the cheapest hatchback from some developing nation in South East Asia, so once again hardly worth the effort.

Perhaps the best reason for not undertaking such a modification is that of continued parts supply long term. I have to admit that I don't know whether MagaSquirt make fuel delivery systems for motor manufacturers generally, but if it came to the crunch, I would back parts for the dear old SU being available way into the future, whereas I would have doubts about spares for this type of fuel injection being around much beyond next week. Of course, you could always store the original parts, but restoring and refitting a carburettor that has not run for a number of years throws up its own problems. From a monetary point of view, I would suggest that such a modification may well lower the value of a car; I certainly wouldn't buy one thus modified for the above stated reason.

To my mind, the only valid reason for installing such a system is its effect on the control of pollution presumably when used in conjunction with a catalytic convertor. However, this may negate any performance advantage obtained, however slight.

[Uncle Joe]

I dont wish to offend anyone here, and I might do but...

SU's are nowhere near the best carbs....in my opinion, that goes to Weber...

Fuel Injection WAS available in the 60's as an accessory, so the fact that it is not period doesnt hold either....

The correct system is relatively easy to fit, and remove, thus keeping originality at a future time of sale.

As far as fuel consumption goes, I agree, it might not make much difference to an A40, but it does to a big V8. I've heard of quite a few yanks doing 25 miles per US gallon.....

[Rick]

FI as an aftermarket accessory may have been available in the 60s (?) but it wouldn't look or behave like a 2007 product I'm sure, so would be a period fitment in nature only. The only A Series I've heard of with FI (from the top of my head) was during the 60s on the last of the works Cooper S Minis, was it available from the over-the-counter tuning shops too? If we were discussing Shorrocks superchargers, then no question it was period mod and ideal for making an oldie go quicker, in the old way.

Whatever, fitting modern installations to radically alter the performance and behavior of an old engine takes away some of the appeal, to me anyway. But I do like to immerse myself in the olde worlde charms of a properly old car as much as possible, so perhaps this is no surprise! Perhaps because I prefer cars that pre-date me, I want them to pre-date me in all areas, with no signs of modern meddling to jarr the overall effect?

Even modern interpretations of old tuning goodies don't hit the spot either - my Ashley had a period twin SU setup (MC2 m/cycle carbs) produced by Aquaplane, all nice levers, brass fittings, and so on. A Prefect I had a little while back had been fitted with a brand new reproduction Aquaplane setup, but none of the design niceties of the original, eg 1 1/4" carbs instead of the MC2s, horrid air filters, and a nasty cable operation for the throttle and choke (the originals had proper mech linkages for both).

Anyway, off out now to stoke up my 1200cc of rippling power, now where's me gloves

R






R
_________________
Rick - Admin
Home:https://www.oldclassiccar.co.uk
Videos:https://www.youtube.com/user/oldclassiccarRJ/videos
OCC & classic car merchandise (Austin, Ford ++):
https://www.redbubble.com/people/OldClassicCar/shop

[Old-Nail]

I agree, I can't see the 'average' family motorist of the 50's or 60's having fuel injection installed, the best they did was to be choosy about the brand of petrol!

I like to feel that when I step into a classic car I am putting myself into the shoes of those many owners 'back in the day', I'm noticing that a Ford Pop's vacuum wipers go off uphill, or that the engine fumes reach the cab when worked hard!

These are things that would be common knowledge to owners of the time so it's strangely nice to rediscover them, a bit like being able to travel back in time!
Any kit, or concept that has been tried and tested since the design of the vehicle in question is treated with caution by me. Better quality bearings, oil, lights and wiring, tyres and braking components I'll go with, even nylon suspension bushes, but further than that I prefer to leave mods to period accessories.

Although if I had my dream car (1950 Buick Roadmaster Riviera) perhaps the fuel consumption aspect would sway me.

[stuchamp]

hmmmm, fuel injection for '57 Chevy's?
Sounds about right!!!

http://www.57classicchevy.com/1957-chevrolet-fuel-injection.html

[Rick]

if you're running an old US car, or any large motor come to think of it, petrol consumption shouldn't be something to worry about - goes with the territory, just like a Pop having no wipers on a hill, or a Herald being snappily tail-happy in extremis

R
_________________
Rick - Admin
Home:https://www.oldclassiccar.co.uk
Videos:https://www.youtube.com/user/oldclassiccarRJ/videos
OCC & classic car merchandise (Austin, Ford ++):
https://www.redbubble.com/people/OldClassicCar/shop

[Red Riley]

[Rick]

don't Webers require more routine fettling to keep them in song? or am I thinking of Dellortos?

R
_________________
Rick - Admin
Home:https://www.oldclassiccar.co.uk
Videos:https://www.youtube.com/user/oldclassiccarRJ/videos
OCC & classic car merchandise (Austin, Ford ++):
https://www.redbubble.com/people/OldClassicCar/shop

[Uncle Joe]

Well, I had twin DCOE's on an ex-Chrysler competitions vehicle, and never touched them for the whole time I had the car, about 70 000 miles or so.

I can agree that SU's will still run if they are well out of tune, but, if you've ever diven say a 3.8 Jag engine with triple Webers, or even a Mini with a ''split Weber'' as they used to be called, opinions would soon change...Remember also the Lotus Cortina (twin DCOE's) or 1500GT (DCD)....

From the classic era, the only british cars that I recall that used SU's were from those companies that ended up as British Leyland...or is my old memory playing tricks on me.

If SU's are so good, then 1) Why does my 7.5 litre Lincoln use less fuel than my old Westminster? and 2) Why could a Spitfire not do a negative g manouver?